I like Prototype because it takes all the work out of Javascript. I've been using it for a few years now but as a PHP developer I usually only used it for Ajax. Only recently have I started to get acquainted with all of its other components, and it is a pleasure to work with. Just last night, for fun, I decided to build a rater just like the one on livepipe.net. I didn't look at their code so that I could really learn how to do it on my own and it only took me a few hours to finish it. Here's the code and examples:
http://www.virgentech.com/code/ratable While JQuery may be fast for someone who knows it, I believe Prototype can be just as fast as long as you know it. I use CSS selectors ($$() and Element.select()) when appropriate, and you're right that it makes things much easier. I'm glad Prototype supports it :) I'm not sure if I agree with all of your points, Diodeus, only because they mostly all also apply to Prototype, too. In other words, I'm not convinced that JQuery will make things any easier for me than Prototype has. Although JQuery is popular, what is popular is not always best (*cough* Windows *cough*). It really just comes down to what works for you and what you feel comfortable with, and right now I am very comfortable with Prototype. -Hector On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 2:58 PM, Andrew Dupont <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > On Sep 26, 10:30 am, 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 > > The last few months have been unusual for Prototype Core: most of us > have been especially busy in our day jobs. Prototype has always been a > side project, but then most open source projects are; JQuery is in the > enviable position of having its full-time development fully funded > (Paul Bakaus's employer pays him to work on jQuery). > > > 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. > > In truth, I'd agree with most of the suggestions on how we could > improve our community. We're not lacking in initiative; we're lacking > in time, and if anyone reading this considers himself/herself good at > managing mailing lists, evangelizing, organizing documentation, and > the like, we'd love to have your help. > > In other words, Prototype won't be like MochiKit, which languished > because its author lost interest. We just need to find more people > that are (a) willing to help out in ways that don't involve writing > code; and (b) able to get stuff done. We've got plenty of A, but not > much of B, mostly because the people who want to help out are often > just as busy as we are. > > > Perhaps 1.6.1 will breath some new life into things, or maybe not. > > Nick, I take your opinion very seriously, and it unsettles me to know > you're this pessimistic about the future of Prototype. It means we > haven't been doing our jobs well lately. We're going to push out > 1.6.0.3 as soon as we can and then start focusing on 1.6.1 (which I > guarantee will have some stuff you'll love). > > Cheers, > Andrew > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
