"I think Prototype.js is a lost cause by design."
So-- then what are you doing on the Prototype/script.aculo.us mailing
list? :)
The sole point of Prototype is to give the programmer a powerful,
opinionated
toolset, to make programming JavaScript less pain (with some extra
special
sugar-on-the-top for Ruby devs).
IMHO, saying things like 'I would guess that Prototype.js breaks
other specs' and
'I'm left wondering what other disasters will crop up in the future'
is just spreading
FUD.
Spreading FUD on JavaScript-related stuff won't help any libraries
out there.
Best,
Thomas
Am 20.07.2006 um 02:12 schrieb Peter Michaux:
On 7/19/06, Todd Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[Prototype.js is] the cleanest, most elegant
JavaScript code base that I've ever laid eyes on.
I respect your right to think that but I certainly feel the other way
on the issue. For me, Prototype.js suffers from being too clever for
it's own good. With the Yahoo! UI library I can just jump straight in
and start reading the code and make sense of it. Prototype.js seems to
abstract things way to much to a terse style that is unreadable. (I
just read a blog about this happening in Ruby code
http://blog.hasmanythrough.com/articles/2006/07/19/speaking-at-
rubyconf-2006)
---------------
Prototype.js was written without full regard for the ECMAScript
specifications. Prototype.js makes use of properties like $() and $A()
which the ECMAScript specifications
http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/files/ECMA-ST/
Ecma-262.pdf
says
"The dollar sign is intended for use only in mechanically generated
code."
Prototype.js also over uses $() at the beginning of so many functions
where it is not necessary. The calling function is sending the results
of a $() anyway.
This is just one example but I would guess that Prototype.js breaks
other specs but I don't know for sure.
---------------
Playing with the prototypes of built-in JavaScript objects like Object
was a big design mistake. (I imagine Sam got this idea from page 123
of Flanagan's JavaScript 4th ed by O'Reilly.) Although this tampering
is possible it is probably not wise for a big library that must play
nicely with other libraries.
Given this design decision was made at all, the disasters it has
caused, and that the same attitude was likely taken in making other
design decisions, I'm left wondering what other disasters will crop up
in the future.
---------------
Prototype.js is not "cross-browser". I believe it is buggy partly due
to the obscuring effect of all the "write-javascript-like-ruby" code.
It is partly buggy because Sam is elusive.
Prototype.js uses navigator.userAgent instead of feature detection
where it is possible. This means that as browsers evolve Prototype.js
does not automatically evolve with them. It is an endless maintenance
cycle (at least worse than it needs to be).
--------------
The Ruby-style enumerable stuff is a good way to cause trouble. It is
many lines of JavaScript. It doesn't really save bytes that need to be
downloaded by a user. Even if it does save a bite or two it would take
a big library to make up for the bulk in Prototype.js to set up the
enumerable stuff.
Because the enumerable stuff is written in JavaScript it will never
run as quickly as native JavaScript loops. The enumerable stuff will
never be as easily read or maintained by a JavaScript expert not
familiar with Prototype.js. The enumerable stuff will probably need
tinkering along the way and new bugs will appear. JavaScript is not a
cool as Ruby but it is not assembly level language either. Using the
native loops is better in my opinion.
--------------
If I were asked to reflect on the decision to adopt Prototype
today then I'd say that I
probably backed the wrong horse,
Unfortunately so did Rails and Scriptaculous. Rails is the biggest
community using Prototype.js and I think it will ultimately hold back
Rails because it is so convoluted. I think a new JavaScript library
should be chosen or developed for use with Rails and have a plugin
Ruby wrapper. Then move Prototype out to a plugin for backwards
compatibility and absorb the new library into Rails as the default.
> I would like to see Prototype.js out of Rails in favor of something
> more like the Yahoo! UI approach. More modular. More standard style
> JavaScript.
And /significantly/ more verbose.
Something _like_ Yahoo! UI. I don't think YUI is the perfect solution.
I certainly think YAHOO.util.Dom.getXY() could be shortened to
YUI.getXY().
Prototype.js is a huge library. Something like 1800 lines if I
remember correctly. And Prototype.js is going to get even bigger to
overcome _only one_ of it's problems in a backwards compatible way.
http://sam.conio.net/
And, that's the rub. It's why I've been such a vocal critic of
the way
that its being maintained. Prototype *is* falling behind. There is
*no* stated direction for the project.
There is a stated direction it just isn't very inspiring
http://sam.conio.net/
It has one foot in the grave.
The people who want to contribute to its success are being put off.
A bad sign for sure. But this could easily be fixed by a higher up
like DHH himself.
> For example, I virtually rewrote the scriptaculous drag and drop
> library to clean it up and fix about 15 tickets total. The whole
thing
> deadended because I couldn't take the punishment that
Prototype.js was
> giving to me daily.
And did you submit patches for those tickets before giving up?
Thomas
has been pretty responsive in my experience.
No I didn't submit patches because they were all part of the rewrite.
I was so discouraged by the use of Prototype.js I just shelved the
project and moved on to other things. After really digging through the
dragdrop library for a week and refactoring/rewriting it in the same
style, I decided I just didn't want any part of a library built on
Prototype.js. I emailed with Thomas a couple times and he was quite
responsive.
I think Prototype.js is a lost cause by design.
Peter
_______________________________________________
Rails-spinoffs mailing list
Rails-spinoffs@lists.rubyonrails.org
http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails-spinoffs
--
Thomas Fuchs
wollzelle
http://www.wollzelle.com
questentier on AIM
madrobby on irc.freenode.net
http://www.fluxiom.com :: online digital asset management
http://script.aculo.us :: Web 2.0 JavaScript
http://mir.aculo.us :: Where no web developer has gone before
_______________________________________________
Rails-spinoffs mailing list
Rails-spinoffs@lists.rubyonrails.org
http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails-spinoffs
