Expanding somewhat on T.J.'s point, i definitely couldn't work without
Prototype's data management utilities (Enumerable, Object extensions,
etc).
i love jQuery's compactness and efficiency, but with almost no
attention to Javascript data, i'd rather sacrifice it's DOM efficiency
to have Prototype's data/object manipulation skills.
For lightweight websites that don't require a lot of local data
treatment, i'll use jQuery because it's fairly easy to get used to,
and compact. For anything where i'm retrieving server data or managing
data within the client for an app, i stick to Prototype, and i've
rarely had occasion for them to overlap.
Just my thoughts. It's not a blog, i know, but since you asked... :)
joe t.
On Jul 6, 12:39 am, P.J. pjfontil...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks T.J. The Language section is definitely a prime example of an
area Prototype excels at where jQuery does little in. My aim is to use
both libraries in a manner that complements each other. Just looking
for positive reinforcement in that idea; looking for specific
strengths each library has.
On Jul 5, 2:15 am, T.J. Crowder t...@crowdersoftware.com wrote:
Hi,
Just generally speaking, but: If you go to the API reference[1], most
things in the Language section fall into the category of things
Prototype provides that jQuery doesn't. jQuery has $.each, but most of
the other stuff in Prototype's Enumerable isn't in jQuery.
I _think_ Prototype 1.7 (currently at RC2) has better support for
querying the layout of elements than jQuery does -- for instance,
finding out the current pixel value of an auto margin.
[1]http://api.prototypejs.org/
FWIW,
--
T.J. Crowder
Independent Software Consultant
tj / crowder software / comwww.crowdersoftware.com
On Jul 4, 6:24 pm, P.J. pjfontil...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi guys,
First off, here's a reference I'd like you to read so you'll
understand where I'm coming from.http://jqueryvsmootools.com/
It's written by Aaron Newton and it's about jQuery and MooTools. Short
and sweet, jQuery focuses on the DOM, and does a pretty good job with
it; and MooTools focuses on the entire JavaScript language.
Aaron's MooTools is my Prototype. I have a library that uses both
jQuery and Prototype. I'm not using Scriptaculous as jQuery can handle
most of the UI. I've been using Prototype to parse JSON and retrieve
data from external sources, and always consider using it first when I
come across something difficult to code. I have both in my library
because I wanted to be able to use widgets for both, thus netting me a
large variety of widgets and functionality from both camps.
Should I be treating Prototype similar to how Aaron views MooTools? As
an extension of the entire JavaScript language as a whole?
Does anyone have any examples of situations where Prototype provides
functionality that jQuery doesn't? Mainly, anything outside the UI.
jQuery also supports JSON usage, but by using Prototype I can not only
parse JSON but XML and other arbitrary data types as well. I wish to
re-evaluate my decision to use both in one library, especially if one
of my reasons was the usage of plugins from both camps and the other
was that Prototype and jQuery serve different purposes.
Please help me out, I always attempt to contribute my findings back to
the community and would greatly appreciate it.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Prototype script.aculo.us group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-scriptacul...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
prototype-scriptaculous+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-scriptaculous?hl=en.
