Re: [jQuery] JQuery vs prototype
On 28/03/07, Jörn Zaefferer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Michel Brouckaert schrieb: If you have more time and the project would be a really big one, i would advice you to rather use Prototype. Class based designs mostly only pay off in huge projects because of reusability. So at the end of the line I think it depends... I think reusing jQuery code by putting it in the form of plugins works great in big projects too. After all, a big project can only work if its carefully assembled of small parts. And those small parts can be jQuery plugins. Of course there are aspects, mostly domain-specific, that are not well represented as plugins. But I wouldn't implement those in JavaScript anyway. -- Jörn Zaefferer http://bassistance.de I think JavaScript is mostly use as a way to enhance the user experience and reduce the load on the web server. Pages should not rely on it to work. Although, to be honest, I have done a few pages that need it, but the users are guaranteed to have it enabled (as their either aren't many of them, or the application is used internally). If you are providing information for a wide audience (e.g. health related) then it certainly should not be a requirement as I can imagine there would be issues with accessibility (for those using alternative browsing methods or with JavaScript turned off). When I was initially looking at frameworks, Prototype was one of my first choices, but the lack of documentation put me off. I'm also not keen of the obtrusiveness that it encourages. Others (can't recall which ones) did not look easy to use and / or a bit heavy weight (I don't think Mootools even existed). I wonder what would have happened if jQuery was not created? Prototype may never have been documented and JavaScript libraries in general would not have been as good (competition helps to motivate people). ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] JQuery vs prototype
I've started serious javascript programming using prototype (including ajax). I found javascript programming with prototype fun and easy. Then I discovered jQuery. And then I found javascript programming with prototype long and boring. I think the jQuery way is far more efficient and clean. Thanks to its powerful Dom query engine, it forces you to have all your javascript outside of your body, which 1 - is a very good practise because your code is more readable and maintainable. 2 - it's far more easier to make your scripts unobstrusive. Chainablility is the second best stuff I found in jQuery. 1- It allows you to write very compact while super-readable code 2 - It makes it very easy to understand the plugin mechanism and write yours. In other words, I won't use prototype anymore. But give it a try anyway (and try the others too) ! Le 28 mars 07 à 12:10, Sam Collett a écrit : On 28/03/07, Jörn Zaefferer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Michel Brouckaert schrieb: If you have more time and the project would be a really big one, i would advice you to rather use Prototype. Class based designs mostly only pay off in huge projects because of reusability. So at the end of the line I think it depends... I think reusing jQuery code by putting it in the form of plugins works great in big projects too. After all, a big project can only work if its carefully assembled of small parts. And those small parts can be jQuery plugins. Of course there are aspects, mostly domain-specific, that are not well represented as plugins. But I wouldn't implement those in JavaScript anyway. -- Jörn Zaefferer http://bassistance.de I think JavaScript is mostly use as a way to enhance the user experience and reduce the load on the web server. Pages should not rely on it to work. Although, to be honest, I have done a few pages that need it, but the users are guaranteed to have it enabled (as their either aren't many of them, or the application is used internally). If you are providing information for a wide audience (e.g. health related) then it certainly should not be a requirement as I can imagine there would be issues with accessibility (for those using alternative browsing methods or with JavaScript turned off). When I was initially looking at frameworks, Prototype was one of my first choices, but the lack of documentation put me off. I'm also not keen of the obtrusiveness that it encourages. Others (can't recall which ones) did not look easy to use and / or a bit heavy weight (I don't think Mootools even existed). I wonder what would have happened if jQuery was not created? Prototype may never have been documented and JavaScript libraries in general would not have been as good (competition helps to motivate people). ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/ ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] JQuery vs prototype
thanks! ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
[jQuery] JQuery vs prototype
can you help me? what benefits of JQuery vs prototype?(http://www.prototypejs.org/) ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] JQuery vs prototype
Hi Denis, Best thing you can do is experiment with both and even throw in some of the others (YUI, Dojo, Mochi, mootools) and see which style fits you best. The benefits of using one over the other are going to vary differently for different people and different projects. Once you play around with the different libraries out there. I believe you will find jQuery to be more oriented at making your life much easier when having to muck about with the DOM and your typical daily tasks as a web developer. Once you start to really dig into jQuery you will find that the code you write on top of jQuery is extremely small and packs a large punch. -- Brandon Aaron On 3/27/07, Denis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: can you help me? what benefits of JQuery vs prototype?(http://www.prototypejs.org/) ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/ ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] JQuery vs prototype
I was a long time prototype user and have been taking jQuery for a spin recently. I wrote a little about what I think at http://musetracks.instantspot.com/blog/index.cfm/2007/3/22/jQuery-isSmooth. On 3/27/07, Brandon Aaron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Denis, Best thing you can do is experiment with both and even throw in some of the others (YUI, Dojo, Mochi, mootools) and see which style fits you best. The benefits of using one over the other are going to vary differently for different people and different projects. Once you play around with the different libraries out there. I believe you will find jQuery to be more oriented at making your life much easier when having to muck about with the DOM and your typical daily tasks as a web developer. Once you start to really dig into jQuery you will find that the code you write on top of jQuery is extremely small and packs a large punch. -- Brandon Aaron On 3/27/07, Denis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: can you help me? what benefits of JQuery vs prototype?(http://www.prototypejs.org/) ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/ ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/ ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] JQuery vs prototype
what benefits of JQuery vs prototype?(http://www.prototypejs.org/) In reality, most js frameworks offer similar core functionality. What you're usually comparing is syntax and general coding approach, which vary quite a bit based on personal preferences. All frameworks are going to let you add a class to an element, for example, and all should do it without any problems. I think the key differences between jQuery and Prototype are: 1) Prototype encourages a class-based structure, which IMO is not very javascripty. If you want classes, look at Prototype. 2) jQuery encourages a coding style that is short and easy to read. The look how easy it is with Prototype! examples usually resemble obfuscated Perl more than Javascript to me. 3) Prototype is tied closely to the Ruby on Rails community. If you use Ruby on Rails, definitely choose Prototype. Outside of that community I see no reason to choose Prototype over other frameworks like jQuery or even Moo. If you must have a class-based design, look at Moo. If you like readable code, look at jQuery. Matt Kruse ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] JQuery vs prototype
Matt Kruse schrieb: 3) Prototype is tied closely to the Ruby on Rails community. If you use Ruby on Rails, definitely choose Prototype. We're currently using Rails together with jQuery and I can't second that. Although you loose some of the super-easy to implement helpers (which produce obtrusive, inaccessible JavaScript anyway) you win that back through jQuery's conciseness. I even managed to convert a Rails Guru to jQuery :-) And jQuery on Rails is not even out there... -- Klaus ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] JQuery vs prototype
On Mar 27, 2007, at 10:47 AM, Matt Kruse wrote: 3) Prototype is tied closely to the Ruby on Rails community. If you use Ruby on Rails, definitely choose Prototype. Outside of that community I see no reason to choose Prototype over other frameworks like jQuery or even Moo. If you must have a class-based design, look at Moo. If you like readable code, look at jQuery. Yehuda Katz has been using jQuery with Rails pretty extensively over the past few months, so it would be interesting to get his take on this as well. He also has been working on a jQuery for Rails plugin that should help Rails developers transition to jQuery quite easily. --Karl _ Karl Swedberg www.englishrules.com www.learningjquery.com ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] JQuery vs prototype
Denis schrieb: can you help me? what benefits of JQuery vs prototype?(http://www.prototypejs.org/) You may find jQuery's community very, very active, friendly and helpful. Something I haven't seen or experienced in this form in any other open source project. Something that may weigh much more then any technical aspects once you get used to it :-) -- Jörn Zaefferer http://bassistance.de ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] JQuery vs prototype
well, I am on an internship, and i had a couple of weeks to learn how ajax worked, implement it in code and then take it to a production level. I first tried a couple of prototype based libary's and I have to say that if you need to be programming quiet fast and have properly written code. you should look at JQuery it offers loads of functionality that is learned on a couple of days, and once you dig deeper in to it. Everything becomes relevant. If you have more time and the project would be a really big one, i would advice you to rather use Prototype. Class based designs mostly only pay off in huge projects because of reusability. So at the end of the line I think it depends... have fun with it, Michel Brouckaert 2007/3/27, Jörn Zaefferer [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Denis schrieb: can you help me? what benefits of JQuery vs prototype?(http://www.prototypejs.org/) You may find jQuery's community very, very active, friendly and helpful. Something I haven't seen or experienced in this form in any other open source project. Something that may weigh much more then any technical aspects once you get used to it :-) -- Jörn Zaefferer http://bassistance.de ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/ ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] JQuery vs prototype
Michel Brouckaert schrieb: If you have more time and the project would be a really big one, i would advice you to rather use Prototype. Class based designs mostly only pay off in huge projects because of reusability. So at the end of the line I think it depends... I think reusing jQuery code by putting it in the form of plugins works great in big projects too. After all, a big project can only work if its carefully assembled of small parts. And those small parts can be jQuery plugins. Of course there are aspects, mostly domain-specific, that are not well represented as plugins. But I wouldn't implement those in JavaScript anyway. -- Jörn Zaefferer http://bassistance.de ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] jQuery and Prototype
Jan Rosa schrieb: Hello, I think there i no need to replace $ in next release. You can employ server searchreplace Look at example: http://www.freshconcept.cz/uschovna/jQueryIsolate.phps then you use: script type=text/javascript src=...pathto/jQueryIsolate.php?js=jquery-latest.js,pause.js,hovertip.js/script Interesting. But I'd consider that only a workaround, not a solution. -- Jörn ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
[jQuery] jQuery and Prototype
Hi Folks, First of all thank you John for writing jQuery. I've read the wiki page regarding using jQuery and prototype together and couldn't get it to work reliably. I did load prototype first but ended up going through the jQuery source code and renamed $() to JQ(). It would be kind of cool if the $ function could be renamed via a configuration setting Thanks, Laurent ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] jQuery and Prototype
Original-Nachricht Datum: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 08:12:51 -0700 Von: Laurent Yaish [EMAIL PROTECTED] An: discuss@jquery.com Betreff: [jQuery] jQuery and Prototype Hi Folks, First of all thank you John for writing jQuery. I've read the wiki page regarding using jQuery and prototype together and couldn't get it to work reliably. I did load prototype first but ended up going through the jQuery source code and renamed $() to JQ(). It would be kind of cool if the $ function could be renamed via a configuration setting It should be enough to change this line: var $ = jQuery; to something else, like var JQ = jQuery. But this won't solve the problem that most plugins use the $ alias instead of jQuery. -- Jörn PS: http://jquery.com/dev/bugs/bug/253/ -- GMX DSL-Flatrate 0,- Euro* - Überall, wo DSL verfügbar ist! NEU: Jetzt bis zu 16.000 kBit/s! http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] jQuery and Prototype
The jQuery code itself uses $
toggle: function(){
$(this)[ $(this).is(:hidden) ? show :
hide ].apply( $(this),
arguments );
},
The $ is great for the end user, but it is a very generic alias. I
don't think it is a good idea for jQuery or plugins to use it
internally. But it might already be too late to change this...
Thanks
Laurent
On 10/6/06, Jörn Zaefferer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Original-Nachricht
Datum: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 08:12:51 -0700
Von: Laurent Yaish [EMAIL PROTECTED]
An: discuss@jquery.com
Betreff: [jQuery] jQuery and Prototype
Hi Folks,
First of all thank you John for writing jQuery. I've read the wiki page
regarding using jQuery and prototype together and couldn't get it to work
reliably. I did load prototype first but ended up going through the
jQuery source code
and renamed $() to JQ().
It would be kind of cool if the $ function could be renamed via a
configuration setting
It should be enough to change this line: var $ = jQuery; to something else,
like var JQ = jQuery.
But this won't solve the problem that most plugins use the $ alias instead of
jQuery.
-- Jörn
PS: http://jquery.com/dev/bugs/bug/253/
--
GMX DSL-Flatrate 0,- Euro* - Überall, wo DSL verfügbar ist!
NEU: Jetzt bis zu 16.000 kBit/s! http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
___
jQuery mailing list
discuss@jquery.com
http://jquery.com/discuss/
___
jQuery mailing list
discuss@jquery.com
http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] jQuery and Prototype
I think it would be worth it to change all internals of jQuery to not
use $. Essentially it is just a find and replace ... the issue is
getting plugins to do it. I think the next release should force the
issue.
--
Brandon Aaron
On 10/6/06, Laurent Yaish [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The jQuery code itself uses $
toggle: function(){
$(this)[ $(this).is(:hidden) ? show :
hide ].apply( $(this),
arguments );
},
The $ is great for the end user, but it is a very generic alias. I
don't think it is a good idea for jQuery or plugins to use it
internally. But it might already be too late to change this...
Thanks
Laurent
On 10/6/06, Jörn Zaefferer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Original-Nachricht
Datum: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 08:12:51 -0700
Von: Laurent Yaish [EMAIL PROTECTED]
An: discuss@jquery.com
Betreff: [jQuery] jQuery and Prototype
Hi Folks,
First of all thank you John for writing jQuery. I've read the wiki page
regarding using jQuery and prototype together and couldn't get it to work
reliably. I did load prototype first but ended up going through the
jQuery source code
and renamed $() to JQ().
It would be kind of cool if the $ function could be renamed via a
configuration setting
It should be enough to change this line: var $ = jQuery; to something else,
like var JQ = jQuery.
But this won't solve the problem that most plugins use the $ alias instead
of jQuery.
-- Jörn
PS: http://jquery.com/dev/bugs/bug/253/
--
GMX DSL-Flatrate 0,- Euro* - Überall, wo DSL verfügbar ist!
NEU: Jetzt bis zu 16.000 kBit/s! http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
___
jQuery mailing list
discuss@jquery.com
http://jquery.com/discuss/
___
jQuery mailing list
discuss@jquery.com
http://jquery.com/discuss/
___
jQuery mailing list
discuss@jquery.com
http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] jQuery and Prototype
Yes it is a simple search and replace, that's what I just did to get
prototype and jQuery to work together. Even for plugin authors this
should be a very simple change. When is the next release due?
On 10/6/06, Brandon Aaron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think it would be worth it to change all internals of jQuery to not
use $. Essentially it is just a find and replace ... the issue is
getting plugins to do it. I think the next release should force the
issue.
--
Brandon Aaron
On 10/6/06, Laurent Yaish [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The jQuery code itself uses $
toggle: function(){
$(this)[ $(this).is(:hidden) ? show :
hide ].apply( $(this),
arguments );
},
The $ is great for the end user, but it is a very generic alias. I
don't think it is a good idea for jQuery or plugins to use it
internally. But it might already be too late to change this...
Thanks
Laurent
On 10/6/06, Jörn Zaefferer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Original-Nachricht
Datum: Fri, 6 Oct 2006 08:12:51 -0700
Von: Laurent Yaish [EMAIL PROTECTED]
An: discuss@jquery.com
Betreff: [jQuery] jQuery and Prototype
Hi Folks,
First of all thank you John for writing jQuery. I've read the wiki page
regarding using jQuery and prototype together and couldn't get it to
work
reliably. I did load prototype first but ended up going through the
jQuery source code
and renamed $() to JQ().
It would be kind of cool if the $ function could be renamed via a
configuration setting
It should be enough to change this line: var $ = jQuery; to something
else, like var JQ = jQuery.
But this won't solve the problem that most plugins use the $ alias
instead of jQuery.
-- Jörn
PS: http://jquery.com/dev/bugs/bug/253/
--
GMX DSL-Flatrate 0,- Euro* - Überall, wo DSL verfügbar ist!
NEU: Jetzt bis zu 16.000 kBit/s! http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
___
jQuery mailing list
discuss@jquery.com
http://jquery.com/discuss/
___
jQuery mailing list
discuss@jquery.com
http://jquery.com/discuss/
___
jQuery mailing list
discuss@jquery.com
http://jquery.com/discuss/
___
jQuery mailing list
discuss@jquery.com
http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] jQuery and Prototype
So you think JQuery should change the $ to another identifier or you feel JQuery should implement namespaces? If its the latter, I'm not keen on that. I like the shorter code approach the JQuery and Prototype use but if there's a way to keep that (eg: JQ()), then I'd go for something like that. Rey... Brandon Aaron wrote: I think it would be worth it to change all internals of jQuery to not use $. Essentially it is just a find and replace ... the issue is getting plugins to do it. I think the next release should force the issue. ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] jQuery and Prototype
I think 'jQuery(...)' should still be used internally and by plugin authors for the foreseeable future. If file size is an issue, the code could always be compressed/packed. Yep, totally agree - the internal uses of $() instead of jQuery() are definitely a mistake - just me lapsing back into that way of writing. Sorry about that. --John ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] jQuery and Prototype
Mike Alsup schrieb: I agree completely. I'll update my plugins today. Mike Me too! Ok, maybe not today, but then tomorrow :-) -- Klaus ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] jQuery and Prototype
Thanks Brandon. Thats what I wanted to understand. Rey... Brandon Aaron wrote: Removing the alias throughout the core and the plugins will make it easier for those who need to integrate with Atlas and prototype. Just making it a one line fix to change the alias to something else. The '$' would stay the default alias. This will have no impact on normal development and provide a more flexible system for those who need it. -- Brandon Aaron On 10/6/06, Rey Bango [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Laurent, I was actually replying to Brandon re: his suggestion. I wanted to get a better understanding from him on the change he suggested and how that would impact normal, non-plugin development. Rey... ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] jQuery and Prototype
Klaus Hartl schrieb: Mike Alsup schrieb: I agree completely. I'll update my plugins today. Mike Me too! Ok, maybe not today, but then tomorrow :-) Thank you Jörn! :-) -- Klaus ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] jQuery vs Prototype
Oh yeah, and also because of the Devo hat logo. It just does it for me. Hey John, if you ever get tired of the New Wave Javascript tagline, how about Whip Your Scripts Into Shape? Haha! I like that a lot :-) Maybe that'll be the tag line for the re-launched site. Or maybe something like Whipping Javascript into Shape. I like those a lot :-) --John ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
[jQuery] jQuery vs Prototype
Hello, I'm new to this mailing list and have recently begun the process of evaluating jQuery. After looking at a wide variety of _javascript_/Ajax libraries, I've narrowed my choices down to jQuery and Prototype. Though I understand there's nothing stopping me from using both, there's lots of overlapping functionality from what I can tell and I'd prefer to pick one as my primary solution. I'm having a hard time finding good information that directly compares the 2 libraries. I assume the in exchange for the much smaller file size, I'd be giving up a good deal of functionality by going with jQuery. I've begun going through what documentation and articles do exist in an attempt to put my own comparison together, but I was wondering if anyone who has experience with both libraries could provide a broad overview of their main differences? Thanks! Todd ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] jQuery vs Prototype
You'd be surprised at how much functionality jQuery packs into such a small package. I used to use prototype, but I've switched to jQuery completely. Maybe the largest piece of functionality you'll give up is access to some of the other stuff that leverages prototype (e.g. scriptaculous). However jQuery has a thriving plugin community that's rapidly expanding the quite of bolt-on goodness. My main reason for switching to jQuery is it's terseness and expressiveness. The chainable method strategy often results in being 50-75% shorter code than equivalent prototype code. There's some examples documenting this phenomena on the jQuery blog. For me terser, more expressive code is not only more productive, but more readable and easier to debug. Corey On Aug 16, 2006, at 12:51 PM, Menier, Todd wrote: Hello, I'm new to this mailing list and have recently begun the process of evaluating jQuery. After looking at a wide variety of Javascript/ Ajax libraries, I've narrowed my choices down to jQuery and Prototype. Though I understand there's nothing stopping me from using both, there's lots of overlapping functionality from what I can tell and I'd prefer to pick one as my primary solution. I'm having a hard time finding good information that directly compares the 2 libraries. I assume the in exchange for the much smaller file size, I'd be giving up a good deal of functionality by going with jQuery. I've begun going through what documentation and articles do exist in an attempt to put my own comparison together, but I was wondering if anyone who has experience with both libraries could provide a broad overview of their main differences? Thanks! Todd ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/ ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] jQuery vs Prototype
I would agree with Corey. We've been using jquery in a large scale application. We evaluated jquery and prototype a while back but were forced to start prototyping ui's quickly and so we picked jquery and figured we'd re-evaluate when implementation began. We've never re-evaluated since there has never been a need. We went from the prototype to implementation phase faster than planned and have been able to develop robust components with amazing speed. (One example of a component is http://jdsharp.us/code/jd_Menu/jd_Menu.html)I can't speak to prototype since I haven't used it extensively, so let's just say that jquery has never given me a reason to look anywhere else. Great work John!-jsOn 8/16/06, Corey Jewett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You'd be surprised at how much functionality jQuery packs into such asmall package. I used to use prototype, but I've switched to jQuery completely.Maybe the largest piece of functionality you'll give up is access tosome of the other stuff that leverages prototype (e.g.scriptaculous). However jQuery has a thriving plugin community that's rapidly expanding the quite of bolt-on goodness.My main reason for switching to jQuery is it's terseness andexpressiveness. The chainable method strategy often results in being50-75% shorter code than equivalent prototype code. There's some examples documenting this phenomena on the jQuery blog. For meterser, more expressive code is not only more productive, but morereadable and easier to debug.CoreyOn Aug 16, 2006, at 12:51 PM, Menier, Todd wrote: Hello, I'm new to this mailing list and have recently begun the process of evaluating jQuery. After looking at a wide variety of _javascript_/ Ajax libraries, I've narrowed my choices down to jQuery and Prototype. Though I understand there's nothing stopping me from using both, there's lots of overlapping functionality from what I can tell and I'd prefer to pick one as my primary solution. I'm having a hard time finding good information that directly compares the 2 libraries. I assume the in exchange for the much smaller file size, I'd be giving up a good deal of functionality by going with jQuery. I've begun going through what documentation and articles do exist in an attempt to put my own comparison together, but I was wondering if anyone who has experience with both libraries could provide a broad overview of their main differences? Thanks! Todd ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/___jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.comhttp://jquery.com/discuss/ ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] jQuery vs Prototype
Im with Jonathan on this one. jQuery is the only library ive ever used, and its done everything ive ever needed.On 8/16/06, Jonathan Sharp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:I would agree with Corey. We've been using jquery in a large scale application. We evaluated jquery and prototype a while back but were forced to start prototyping ui's quickly and so we picked jquery and figured we'd re-evaluate when implementation began. We've never re-evaluated since there has never been a need. We went from the prototype to implementation phase faster than planned and have been able to develop robust components with amazing speed. (One example of a component is http://jdsharp.us/code/jd_Menu/jd_Menu.html)I can't speak to prototype since I haven't used it extensively, so let's just say that jquery has never given me a reason to look anywhere else. Great work John!-jsOn 8/16/06, Corey Jewett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You'd be surprised at how much functionality jQuery packs into such asmall package. I used to use prototype, but I've switched to jQuery completely.Maybe the largest piece of functionality you'll give up is access tosome of the other stuff that leverages prototype (e.g.scriptaculous). However jQuery has a thriving plugin community that's rapidly expanding the quite of bolt-on goodness.My main reason for switching to jQuery is it's terseness andexpressiveness. The chainable method strategy often results in being50-75% shorter code than equivalent prototype code. There's some examples documenting this phenomena on the jQuery blog. For meterser, more expressive code is not only more productive, but morereadable and easier to debug.CoreyOn Aug 16, 2006, at 12:51 PM, Menier, Todd wrote: Hello, I'm new to this mailing list and have recently begun the process of evaluating jQuery. After looking at a wide variety of _javascript_/ Ajax libraries, I've narrowed my choices down to jQuery and Prototype. Though I understand there's nothing stopping me from using both, there's lots of overlapping functionality from what I can tell and I'd prefer to pick one as my primary solution. I'm having a hard time finding good information that directly compares the 2 libraries. I assume the in exchange for the much smaller file size, I'd be giving up a good deal of functionality by going with jQuery. I've begun going through what documentation and articles do exist in an attempt to put my own comparison together, but I was wondering if anyone who has experience with both libraries could provide a broad overview of their main differences? Thanks! Todd ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/___jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/ ___jQuery mailing listdiscuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/ ___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
Re: [jQuery] jQuery vs Prototype
http://jdsharp.us/code/jd_Menu/jd_Menu.html)Doesn't work in Safari 2.0.1___ jQuery mailing list discuss@jquery.com http://jquery.com/discuss/
