Well after using jQuery and then going back to Mootools i do find i like a few thing about jQuery better. One thing i think jQuery does better is going through the DOM and selecting whatever i want fast and easy. I also like the .css() function because in mootools i would have to create a fx.Style object which is overkill for changing something as simple as a css element. This a few issues i am try to resolve with using class with jQUery(I can now create class but some jQuery functions like .each bind info to the "this" variable which is use for class) before i can fully switch to jQuery,
Eridius wrote: > > I have been working with mootools for a bit the past few months and > started to take a look at jQuery too see what the hype is all about from > what i have heard from a co-worker. From what i see, jQuery does not > offer anything that mootools does not. I mean jQuery does have > > removed code becuase mailing list does not like it > > and i don't believe Mootools has anything like that, they just have the: > > removed code becuase mailing list does not like it > > However this is just a shortcut and not a major thing. On thing that > jQuery has is that there are far more scripts however this is just to the > fact that jQuery has been around longer than mootools. However on the > other hand mootools has is a very nice way to create new classes. All i > have to do is: > > http://www.apex-wowguild.com/dev/javascript/ajax.js > > Now I have been told that jQuery tries to do things more like the OO > method. Well to me the basically thing about OO is being able to combine > members(variables) and methods(functions) into a common > place(class/object). I have tried creating a simple class with jQuery and > it does not work(this code if based off what i was told from these > forums): > > removed code becuase mailing list does not like it > > and this code tells me that test() is not a function of test. It seems > that jQuery wants you to incorporate everything into the $() selector > which does not make sense of everything. Being able create separate > object is something that is important to me and jQuery does not seem to > support that. > > Another thing that that jQuery says is that is it so small. Well > comparing the full version of mootools(all options selected) to the full > version of jQuery is unfair. In order to get allt he features of full > mootools you would have to add jQuery interface script and comparing > mootools to jQuery&Interface script, mootools is still smaller. > > So why should someone choose jQuery over Mootools or is it really just a > preference thing and and both are basically the same(i see a lot about > jQuery vs prototype but not alot about jQuery vs mootools) > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Why-jQuery-over-Mootools-tf4254982s15494.html#a12127939 Sent from the JQuery mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
