Message from discussion
Prototype + lowpro vs. JQuery
Received: by 10.35.124.20 with SMTP id b20mr2858990pyn.5.1201318727652;
Fri, 25 Jan 2008 19:38:47 -0800 (PST)
Return-Path: <m...@aimonetti.net>
Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (py-out-1112.google.com [64.233.166.180])
by mx.google.com with ESMTP id a28si3337156pye.0.2008.01.25.19.38.47;
Fri, 25 Jan 2008 19:38:47 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: neutral (google.com: 64.233.166.180 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of m...@aimonetti.net) client-ip=64.233.166.180;
Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 64.233.166.180 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of m...@aimonetti.net) smtp.mail=m...@aimonetti.net
Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id f31so1115412pyh.17
for <low-pro@googlegroups.com>; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 19:38:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.143.16.9 with SMTP id t9mr1695342wfi.107.1201318727391;
Fri, 25 Jan 2008 19:38:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.143.19.13 with HTTP; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 19:38:47 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <f58d8dcb0801251938r688da9fex9992160b1b1ff195@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 19:38:47 -0800
From: "Matt Aimonetti" <mattaimone...@gmail.com>
Sender: m...@aimonetti.net
To: low-pro@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Prototype + lowpro vs. JQuery
In-Reply-To: <5b3e279f0801251922g20060bfbxbf536db9cb41d802@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_Part_2678_16086100.1201318727385"
References: <102c1a64-c792-46f5-95d0-202ce9fdbe3c@j78g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>
<bb99361a0801211126k2df88416h68021d8a797c3f0b@mail.gmail.com>
<f58d8dcb0801211358w51dadccdgc838fb1a6abd11e6@mail.gmail.com>
<5b3e279f0801251922g20060bfbxbf536db9cb41d802@mail.gmail.com>
------=_Part_2678_16086100.1201318727385
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Wow, that would be awesome, I can't wait to give it a try. JQuery already
has livequery but it ain't as good as lowpro!
-Matt
On 1/25/08, Dan Webb <d...@danwebb.net> wrote:
>
>
> On 1/21/08, Matt Aimonetti <mattaimone...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > It would be awesome to port the low pro syntax to JQuery. Now the thing
> is,
> > low pro is just a tiny abstraction layer above proto, in theory we
> should be
> > able to port the same layer to JQuery.
>
> I've considered doing this myself. Ive used both jquery and prototype
> heavily in the past. The reason I like prototype over jquery is that
> prototype offers more general programming tools where as jquery is
> just about dealing with the DOM. Secondarily, in my experience, the
> chaining idiom in jquery tempts people into writing some pretty
> unreadable code.
>
> However, jquery is really compact, very well documented and does its
> job well so I can see the attraction so 10 minutes spend writing
> behaviours on top of it would be well spent. Ill see what I can come
> up with. Something like:
>
> $('.date').attach(DatePicker, { opt1: 34 });
>
> Would do the job, I can even bring over the inheritance stuff...and
> the DOM builder. I'll do it tomorrow morning if I have time.
>
> Cheers for bringing this up...
>
> --
> Dan Webb
> http://www.danwebb.net
>
> aim: danwrong123
> skype: danwrong
>
> >
>
------=_Part_2678_16086100.1201318727385
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Wow, that would be awesome, I can't wait to give it a try. JQuery already has livequery but it ain't as good as lowpro!<br><br>-Matt<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 1/25/08, <b class="gmail_sendername">Dan Webb</b> <<a href="mailto:d...@danwebb.net">d...@danwebb.net</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>On 1/21/08, Matt Aimonetti <<a href="mailto:mattaimone...@gmail.com">mattaimone...@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>> It would be awesome to port the low pro syntax to JQuery. Now the thing is,<br>> low pro is just a tiny abstraction layer above proto, in theory we should be<br>
> able to port the same layer to JQuery.<br><br>I've considered doing this myself. Ive used both jquery and prototype<br>heavily in the past. The reason I like prototype over jquery is that<br>prototype offers more general programming tools where as jquery is<br>
just about dealing with the DOM. Secondarily, in my experience, the<br>chaining idiom in jquery tempts people into writing some pretty<br>unreadable code.<br><br>However, jquery is really compact, very well documented and does its<br>
job well so I can see the attraction so 10 minutes spend writing<br>behaviours on top of it would be well spent. Ill see what I can come<br>up with. Something like:<br><br>$('.date').attach(DatePicker, { opt1: 34 });<br>
<br>Would do the job, I can even bring over the inheritance stuff...and<br>the DOM builder. I'll do it tomorrow morning if I have time.<br><br>Cheers for bringing this up...<br><br>--<br>Dan Webb<br><a href="http://www.danwebb.net">http://www.danwebb.net</a><br>
<br>aim: danwrong123<br>skype: danwrong<br><br>
------=_Part_2678_16086100.1201318727385--
|
