-- S. Alexandre M. Lemaire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote (on Tuesday, 16 September 2008, 01:29 PM -0400): > When we last used Dojo, it would load things 'on demand'; meaning that if > you were to request a certain dojo.* package during usage, it would > dynamically load the package into the mix. The result was a LARGE number of > IO calls solely for loading, this caused great startup delays, and very a > high amount of overhead during routine instantiation (during the > initialization process). > > Does Dojo still behave this way? Does it offer any kind of 'roll your own' > like Ext does with JSBuilder so that you can foresee inclusions and reduce > during-operation IO overhead?
As somebody else noted, Dojo has a custom build tool that you can use to compile, minify, and compress your JS requires into a single file. I've used this extensively, and the performance is incredible. If you use Dojo, this is the recommended practice when deploying your application. > Not that I would ever convert back to Dojo from ExtJS (which by all means, I > am a zealous fanatic of), but I am curious to read about Dojo's progress. > > How is CometD shaping up? Incredibly well. :) Stas Malyshev and I have done demos of it, creating a PHPUnit test runner. The (Bayeux) protocol is mature and the implementation in Dojo stellar. > -----Original Message----- > From: Matthew Weier O'Phinney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 12:10 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [fw-general] Why Dojo of All??? > > -- valugi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote > (on Tuesday, 16 September 2008, 02:41 AM -0700): > > Since now I was also using jQuery and decided to give a try to Dojo since > > it's part of the ZF. > > Doing simple things like an ajax request and fill some data into a table > are > > incredible complex in Dojo. > > I beg to differ here. dojo.data via Zend_Dojo_Data is two lines of code, > and the view script to handle it is approximately 10 lines of primarily > HTML using dojox.Grid. > > > Also the vocabulary changes pretty much. > > Which vocabulary? jquery vs Dojo? Of course -- they're different > frameworks. There will always be a learning curve when you switch > frameworks. > > > I guess with all this complexity come a lot of other goodies... or > > maybe I am wrong. But for now is experimenting time for me. > > Dojo can be as simple or as complex as you want. However, there were > many reasons we chose to use Dojo; for more information, please see > > http://framework.zend.com/announcements/2008-09-03-dojo > > for more details. Basically, when it comes down to all the points of > integration we wanted to be able to offer, Dojo was the only toolkit > that offerred benefits in all areas. The ability to have rapid modular > development, yet still have scalable approaches for production > environments, the breadth of offering in Dojo, the development process > and community surrounding Dojo, the support and driving of web > standards, etc. were simply unparalleled elsewhere. > > The fact of the matter is this is "a done deal." But we're also saying > that we realize that choice in JS toolkits is similar to choice in PHP > frameworks -- and we are encouraging contributors to provide additional > layers via the Extras repository. A jQuery component is already well > underway, and checked in to the Extras incubator. > > Let's stop these threads, please. > > -- > Matthew Weier O'Phinney > Software Architect | [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Zend Framework | http://framework.zend.com/ > -- Matthew Weier O'Phinney Software Architect | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Zend Framework | http://framework.zend.com/
