Andrew Dupont wrote: > The biggest difference between Prototype zealots and zealots of other > libraries, I've found, is that the former embraces the term "philosophy > differences" whereas the latter prefers "poor design decisions." ... > > >> On Nov 29, 12:55 pm, "Peter Michaux" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:... >> >> advantages >> >> * an aspiration for the highest quality code >> * author documentation >> * in-browser unit/integration tests >> * namespaced code >> * does not augment JavaScript built-in prototypes >> * does not add a layer of sugar on top of JavaScript to make >> writing JavaScript like writing in another language >> * Is minimizable with jsmin >> * MIT License >> Andrew, Very well put. I agree that most of these "advantages" are really philosophy preferences. I've been using prototype + scriptaculous heavily for almost a year now, (outside of Ruby) and none of these "advantages" mean anything for my coding situations.
Just wanted to voice my agreement. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" 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/rubyonrails-spinoffs?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
