I'm not sure how to even respond to that. He obviously didn't even take a cursory look at jQuery (the jQuery DOM-centric approach is decidedly different, and probably more powerful than Prototype's monolithic approach). And as Sam said, jQuery need not break Prototype (I, in fact, use Prototype and jQuery together on a major commercial Rails project I'm working on at the moment).
-- Yehuda On 11/24/06, Sam Collett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 24/11/06, Erin Doak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm relatively new to jQuery but am excited about using it. I > recently posted a request to have the jQuery library added to the > list of libraries supported natively by VirtualMart, a Joomla > ecommerce component. The author of VirtualMart has rejected the > request: > http://virtuemart.net/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=71&topic=23597.0 > I writing in hope that someone with more experienced and knowledge > about jQuery than I could respond to him. > > Here is a list of Javascript libraries that are supported: > http://virtuemart.net/index.php?option=com_openwiki&Itemid=109&id=tutorials:javascript_libraries > > Thanks, > > Erin Rejecting it because other libraries depend on Prototype and breaking those libraries seems a bit short sighted. It is easy for it not to break other things using Prototype: var jQ = jQuery then use 'jQ' instead of '$' (if you want something short). That is why plugin authors should use 'jQuery' instead of '$' (or use a closure). What about all the things Prototype breaks? Extending Object is one of the worse things you can do (as it breaks looping through your own objects using for). Of course if you only use Prototype and other libraries that depend on it then that is less of a problem. _______________________________________________ jQuery mailing list [email protected] http://jquery.com/discuss/
-- Yehuda Katz Web Developer | Wycats Designs (ph) 718.877.1325
_______________________________________________ jQuery mailing list [email protected] http://jquery.com/discuss/
