Hi chaps,

Just saw this post.

I wanted to be clear about something. Ben and I really like Prototype.
There is a reason that we choose it at first, and that is because we
like it so much. It feels right to us (I am a Ruby guy...). It extends
JavaScript in the way that we wish JS just *was*.

So, it was really hard to make the call on the switch. If
Thunderhead / Bespin component wasn't going to be something that lives
in any Web app, we wouldn't have had to make a switch at all, but
people were running into issues so we felt backed into a corner on it
(and there were other reasons too).

Having Prototype not make the extensions could have changed things for
us in this case, but I also agree that part of the reason we love
Prototype is because of "foo".trim() instead of dojo.trim("foo"). You
start to really hate seeing the same word again and again for no
reason! :)

I wish that there was an easy way to on the fly turn on and off the
ability and have it all scoped so no one could tread on each others
toes. Grrrrr.

Thanks for a great framework. We will be using it again real soon.

Cheers,

Dion

On Mar 11, 3:08 am, Radoslav Stankov <rstan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I played with prototype to make it, less conflictable. I just wrap the
> whole Prototype lib in closures, and just in the end exposed to the
> global scope only the parts who I needed. It was good enough for me :)
> but one of the main reasons I use prototype is the language extensions
> ( + Dom ones) and the power they give me.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Prototype: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
prototype-core-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-core?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to