Javascript Library

[shapper]

Hello,

I would like to use a javascript library to simplify my coding
process.
I know a few: JQuery, Dojo, Yahoo UI, ...

Which one do you advice me to use?

Thanks,
Miguel

[dhtmlkitchen]

On Dec 6 2007, 9:34*am, David Mark <dmark.cins...@ gmail.comwrote:

On Dec 6, 11:55 am, Matt Kruse <m...@mattkruse .comwrote:

On Dec 6, 10:39 am, David Mark <dmark.cins...@ gmail.comwrote:

ironically, you took many of my arguments against jQuery

I would have liked to have seen more discussion for detecting support
for computedStyles; the bug John mentioned.

When adding a hack for something like getComputedStyl e, it would be
good style to add a comment:

if( cantGetComputed Style( element ) {
// XXX: Safari 2 returns null when element has display: none;
...
// XXX: Safari 3 returns empty strings for getPropertyValu e...
}
@John
<snip>

Considering that IE is going to be backwards compatible for, most
likely, many many years to come, I'm not worried. When the year 2031
arrives, jQuery can, and will adapt.

Providing a case where the code expects a browser to have incorrect
behavior makes it hard for that browser to change. It also makes the
code require more frequent maintenance for user-agents that change. IE
needs a reason to change; a failure case. Chris Wilson talks about
this. Microsoft can't break the web by neglecting current sites.

[dhtmlkitchen]

On Dec 6 2007, 4:15*pm, David Mark <dmark.cins...@ gmail.comwrote:

On Dec 6, 1:29 pm, Matt Kruse <m...@mattkruse .comwrote:

On Dec 6, 11:34 am, David Mark <dmark.cins...@ gmail.comwrote:

The only experience you should need to know that there are major
problems with jQuery is to look at its code. *Much of it forked based
on a meaningless value, which its author thinks indicates MSIE.

Which doesn't necessarily correspond to problems in use or
maintenance, which you are claiming.

Of course it does. *All of its browser sniffing does. *Where have you
been for the last ten years? *You claim to have spent at least some of
that time scripting browsers. *Have you learned anything from the
experience?

Where is your personal experience or anecdotes from others that show
what a maintenance hell jQuery is? Oh, wait, you have none? Because
it's all speculation, and you're crossing your fingers just hoping
that something bad does indeed happen. I'm sure it bothers you that

I couldn't care less what happenes with jQuery or any other library,
unless it happens to be running the current page in my browser.

you have no real cases where the use of jQuery has caused lots of
problems, but you can find _many_ real cases where it has provided a

Go read your own re-hashing of my arguments in the jQuery developer
group as you have apparently forgotten everything you said.

lot of value to a lot of different people. Including small mom-and-pop
operations like Google.

How many times are you going to use Google as an example? *Everybody
knows they employ some of the worst Web developers in history. *The
quality of their JavaScript is notoriously bad. *What makes you think
they make good decisions in that area?

Ironically, you took many of my arguments against jQuery
and ran with them, resulting in recent patches.

I'm not aware of the patches, but I did look over the code that you
critiqued and offered my own version of it. There were obviously some
similarities in our criticisms, and most of your criticisms were

That's an odd way to put it. *You took what I posted and ran with it.
By your own admission, you were happily using this library for however
long, completely oblivious to its time bombs. *You likely would have
continued using it until one day, Firefox or Opera or one of the other
two browsers the stupid thing supports updated and broke some or all
of your applications.

obviously very valid. Good job. I agree with much of your technical
analysis of javascript, but I disagree with many of your conclusions.
I'm fine with that.

You just seem to struggling to accept the conclusions as they
invalidate many of your own mistaken beliefs. *Some fragment of your
personality gets it, else you wouldn't have argued tirelessly to have
various bits of browser sniffing (among other things) removed from
jQuery. *BTW, you have a long way to go if you really want to salvage
that derelict. *Good luck.

The contrast between your arguments here and
your input to the jQuery developers would seem to indicate a split
personality.

Not at all. I still use jQuery and I find it extremely valuable in the
cases where I use it. It needs to improve, especially if I am to use
it on public sites. I am confident that it will improve over time and

But you and others like you are constantly recommending it to people
who build public sites. *Do you not see why that is inappropriate?
That's one of my biggest complaints about the jQuery muppets. *They
argue that they designed something for three browsers and don't care
about the others, but fail to understand that such a design falls way
short of what a public Website requires, recommending their
monstrosity to anybody and everybody, with an almost religious zeal.

come closer to the standard I think it can reach. I have no plans to
abandon it.

Great.