On Jun 29, 8:50 am, astecomm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
[snip]
>
> What do you think about it? Is there any way to avoid this
> "incompatibility" with existent JS code in my web app? Is prototype a
> good way to do things only if you wanna make your app from 0?
>
> Regards,
>
> R.R. Libera


I find it funny that the author would write something like this :

"So I simply had to reject prototype.js because, out of the box, the
very first time I tried to use it - it snuck out and cut the throat of
the JavaScript I was using that relied on performing a for(x in
object) on the contents of an Array."

Because, from my perspective, you do not adopt a javascript library
for only a small part of it. To be more precise, of course you will
run into code refactoring when you start using a new library in a
project. This is not wanted, but the library often provides simpler
ways to perform a task you already defined. The for...in loop is an
example. And especially with Javascript, adopting a coding style will
play an important role when extending, debugging, and refactoring
scripts.

Personally, I think it was about time that a community based framework
was developped for Javascript. And it is somehow ironic, because
Prototype provides an API to do exactly what the author of that blog
is whining about ; offer an abstraction layer over all those non-
standard browser implementations of the ECMAScript specifications.

And in my opinion, I think Prototype is complete enough to use it by
itself in a project. Though I extended the API myself a little, I
mostly concentrate on JS injections and Web components. Now, if only
all browsers would implement CSS in a standard way !

As a final note, I once considered another Web2.0-like library which
has plenty of plugins and extensions : JQuery (http://
jquery.com/) ...and guess what ? It IS compatible with Prototype. But
while both libraries have the same functionalities, they aproach the
DOM differently. My advice, for a project, is to choose a good and
active library, one you're the most confortable with, stick with it,
and avoid adopting multiple coding style. Some people like YUI (http://
developer.yahoo.com/yui/), but I don't. It doesn't make it a bad
framework.




--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to