On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 11:52:47AM -0700, Diodeus wrote: > One this that I always thought strange is why it is called "Prototype" > -- it makes it seem like it's half-built and experimental, rather than > a usable product. While I understand the OO reference, I'm sure many > don't. > > Perhaps the suggestion of merging the two is a valid one (even if they > continue to be two separate pieces). Perhaps all of this would benefit > from a re-branding and a better community-based web site where people > can post more code samples, tutorials and such.
I dislike jQuery. I have criteria for what I consider a useful JS library. Essentially all of them have reasonable DOM manipulation and easy animation and things like that. Some have good reusable controls/widgets/behaviors. But jQuery leaves you high and dry when you need to do things that are not directly related to the DOM. If I need to retrieve a fragment of HTML via AJAX and plop it into the page somewhere, I can do that with anything. If I need to process a JSON response from the AJAX request to generate several dynamic views based on the state of various form controls, however, it gets a lot messier in ways that Prototype makes clean. If I have state to maintain that doesn't live in the DOM, it takes more work with jQuery than Prototype. Once you go beyond the DOM, jQuery is no longer your friend. Because jQuery is so geared toward making it easy to manipulate the DOM, however, it is easier for non-programmers to use and like. There are discussions where I work about standardizing on jQuery because our HTML/CSS guys can work with it more easily. Of course, when they need to do something more complicated they will call on us, the programmers, and we'll have to work in that part of the problem space where jQuery is no help at all. At some point, in my copious free time (ha!), I would like to learn jQuery and Prototype at the source level (i.e. beyond using them as libraries) and see how much work it is to build something that gives me the best of both worlds. I suspect it will be much easier to add jQuery's convenience to Prototype than Prototype's language niceties to jQuery, but it's a worthy experiment. At that point, I might be in a position to build something that really is the best of both worlds. --Greg > On Sep 26, 11:48 am, bluezehn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What prototype desperately needs is a better community than a group on > > google! I mean, there are much better interfaces for communities, and > > there's an irony there that prototype is supposed to be promoting the > > better use of interfaces... Also merging prototype and scriptaculous > > into one project I believe would be beneficial. I understand the > > distinction but it's just confusing for new users. > > > > I love coding on prototype - I think it's fantastic - but if it's not > > going to be supported/developed on in the future, then I'll have no > > choice but to start again with jquery. > > > > On Sep 26, 4:30 pm, Nick Stakenburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I'm not sure if Prototype has a real future, at the moment it seems to > > > be getting more and more a side project for it's authors. The reason > > > jQuery is so popular is it's community, it's certainly not those > > > points in your article since those are true for most frameworks. > > > People who write those articles look at it from one framework and are > > > often not even familiar with other frameworks. > > > > > What would help is if Prototype focussed more on the community, things > > > like scripteka.com need to be intergrated into prototypejs.org . > > > People tend to go with jQuery because all they want is plugins, jQuery > > > has them right there on the main page, while for prototype hardly > > > anyone knows how to find a plugin so the choice for the average guy to > > > pick a framework then becomes very easy. > > > > > Perhaps 1.6.1 will breath some new life into things, or maybe not. > > > > > -- > > > Nick > > > > > On 26 sep, 16:52, Diodeus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > While I am strong advocate of Prototype and Script.aculo.us, I find > > > > that the vast majority of discussion/coverage on the web is focussed > > > > on jQuery. I understand that there are not huge differences in the > > > > capabilities of these two libraries, so why has jQuery gained such > > > > popularity vs Prototype? > > > > > > This really hit home since I've been following questions/discussions > > > > on stackoverflow.com. Prototype is virtually invisible there. I know > > > > this isn't a "library war" and that the two can cheerfully coexist, > > > > and that there is plenty of room in the marketplace for everyone. A > > > > few years from now, where will we be? jQuery seems to be gaining > > > > momentum. > > > > > > Will there be a resurgence in the popularity of Prototype, or will it > > > > fade off into obscurity? (I certainly hope not) > > > > > > Here's the post I read today: > > > > > > - - > > > > -http://stackoverflow.com/questions/139723/which-javascript-framework-... > > > > - - - > > > > Question: Which Javascript Framework is the simplest and most > > > > powerful? > > > > - - - > > > > > > I propose jQuery. > > > > > > I'll give you some of the major arguments from the presentation that > > > > my team put on yesterday for senior management to convince them of > > > > that. > > > > > > Reasons: > > > > > > 1. > > > > > > Community acceptance. Look at this graph. It shows searches for > > > > "prototype", "yui" and "scriptaculous" growing from 2004 to 2008. Then > > > > out of nowhere in 2006 searches fro "jquery" shoot up to double the > > > > number of the other libraries. The community is actually converging on > > > > a single leading product, and it's jQuery. > > > > 2. > > > > > > jQuery is very very succinct and readable. I conducted an > > > > experiment in which I took existing code (selected at random) written > > > > in YUI, and tried re-writing it in jQuery. It was 1/4 as long in > > > > jQuery. That makes it 4 times as easy to write, and 4 times as easy to > > > > maintain. > > > > 3. > > > > > > jQuery integrates well with the rest of the web world. The use > > > > of CSS syntax as the key for selecting items is a brilliant trick > > > > which helps to meld together the highly diseparate worlds of HTML, CSS > > > > and JavaScript. > > > > 4. > > > > > > Documentation: jQuery has excellent documentation, with clear > > > > specifications and working examples of every method. It has excellent > > > > books (I recommend "jQuery in Action".) The only competitor which > > > > matches it is YUI. > > > > 5. > > > > > > Active user community: the Google group which is the main > > > > community discussion forum for Prototype has nearly 1000 members. The > > > > Google group for jQuery has 10 times as many members. And my personal > > > > experience is that the community tends to be helpful. > > > > 6. > > > > > > Easy learning curve. jQuery is easy to learn, even for people > > > > with experience as a designer, but no experience in coding. > > > > 7. > > > > > > Performance. Check out this, which is published by mootools. It > > > > compares the speed of different frameworks. jQuery is not always the > > > > VERY fastest, but it is quite good on every test. > > > > 8. > > > > > > Plays well with others: jQuery's noConflict mode and the core > > > > library's small size help it to work well in environments that are > > > > already using other libraries. > > > > 9. > > > > > > Designed to make JavaScript usable. Looping is a pain in > > > > JavaScript; jQuery works with set objects you almost never need to > > > > write the loop. JavaScript's greatest strength is that functions are > > > > first-class objects; jQuery makes extensive use of this feature. > > > > 10. > > > > > > Plug-ins. jQuery is designed to make it easy to write plugins. > > > > And there is an enormous community of people out there writing > > > > plugins. Anything you want is probably out there. Check out things > > > > like this or this for visual examples. > > > > > > I hope you find this convincing! > > > > - - - > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Prototype & script.aculo.us" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-scriptaculous?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
