Recently errtheblog (http://errtheblog.com/) put up a nice post about  
jQuery. Putting aside all the assertions about cleaner code and fewer  
lines of code than with Prototype, the one thing that struck me from  
his (and others') writing and from direct inspection is this: jQuery  
seems to have a more of an ecosystem surrounding it. That is, more  
plugins, widgets, locked-and-loaded functionality you can plop into  
your app.

My purpose in writing this is to pose a few simple questions for  
discussion:

- Why does it not appear that Prototype/Scripty have such an ecosystem  
of extensions (as do Rails and jQuery)?
- If these extensions exist, how come they are so hard to track down?

My direct comparison, unfairly influenced by my greater experience  
with Prototype, is that there is little difference and that Prototype  
gives me more Rubyisms, so it feels more natural. Now that there is a  
new release, is there anyone in a position to provide a comparison of  
how Proto/Scripty have evolved to address perceived deficiencies  
(again, leaving aside aesthetic or religious things like underlying  
philosophy or "beautiful code"), and is there an existing of planned  
way to provide a repository of proto-based extensions. Really, who  
wants to write yet-another-date-picker or yet-another-photo-scroller?

Please don't get this post wrong. I'm not planning to jump over to  
jQuery for anything. I just wanted to see what all the buzz was about  
-- and there is buzz.

Thanks in advance for your opinions.

--steve

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