On Nov 29, 10:16 pm, "Peter Michaux" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Choosing a library is much more than a simple matter of taste.
You've lost me here. Some libraries may be "better" than others, in
the sense that "The Office" is a lot better than "According to Jim,"
but not to the point where I seek out "According to Jim" fans and call
them inferior. We use the framework, we obviously like it, and we get
stuff done with it, in spite of the fact that it appears to offend your
sensibilities.
> I am not better equiped to decide than you. I want to providing an
> alternative to people using Rails that don't like Prototype.
You need to re-read the stuff you've written in this thread. You've
suggested that choosing Prototype over another framework is
"unfortunate," and you've done so without qualifiers, so I assume you
mean that as a blanket statement.
Again I'll say: I think providing an alternative, Rails-integrated JS
framework is a great idea. I think it'd be useful for people who need
a namespaced library and don't care about making JS feel more
Ruby-like. The only objection I have is with your dogmatism.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
