Went to the official Ajile website, downloaded the thing and took a look. All I can say is, meh. It's not entirely useful, really. First of all the darn thing is written all on a single line (no carriage returns), which I'm assuming was some attempt at saving a few bytes (quite annoying). Secondly, it doesn't really do anything helpful (maybe it has some good points). In an attempt at simulating namespaces, the author has had to fill an array with every system type he could find (maybe all of them, maybe he missed a few), which gets checked any time you try to create or import a namespace, so you don't collide with any system defined objects (who knows how many browser-specific proprietary ones were missed). And then all it's really doing in the end is creating shell objects to act like a dot-naming convention for your actual objects. So it's a really long way around the problem that basically is (once again) simply renaming functions, only in this case is actually adding overhead by having to create shell objects (memory usage) and iterate through the massive array of system types. And it in no way addresses our REAL problem (as prototype.js users), of the built in javascript object prototypes being changed.
So, Martin, once again I have to say if you are using any framework the messes with prototypes, you just have to suck it up and watch out for collisions. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ryan Gahl Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 1:51 PM To: [email protected] Subject: RE: [Rails-spinoffs] Status of Prototype Brilliant, I never heard of that before, thanks Michael. I'm definitely going to take a look at AJILE :) -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Peters Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 1:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Rails-spinoffs] Status of Prototype Martin Marinschek wrote: > Ok, > > if you guys agree, then I would really think that we should try to get > this into prototype. Why should each and every user necessarily do > this if it could fixed by the framework itself? I wasn't saying that the frameword should do it. I was just complaining about the lack of namespaces in Javascript. I think that adding a 'protoType_' extension to every method call and class name would be tedious and ugly (and would give me PHP nightmares). Maybe something like Ajile? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AJILE -- Michael Peters Developer Plus Three, LP _______________________________________________ Rails-spinoffs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails-spinoffs The information transmitted in this electronic mail is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, proprietary, and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from all computers. _______________________________________________ Rails-spinoffs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails-spinoffs _______________________________________________ Rails-spinoffs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails-spinoffs
