

JQuery's latest stab at competence - scarface548
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/browse_frm/thread/3d90e8b8a8301462?pli=1

======
jawngee
All this link says to me is that the people who hang in comp.lang.javascript
are all a bunch of smug pricks.

David Mark comes across like a complete ass. And while his critique of jQuery
might have some validity, his tone and attitude are such a turn off, and the
consequence of him being "right" is not really all that important in the grand
scheme of things.

People build cool shit with jQuery. That's all that is important. While "My
Library" might be better, rate of adoption is sometimes more important than
correctness. Specifically for something as trivial as javascript. If it's
really important to him, why isn't he participating in making jQuery better
since "My Library" is used by virtually nobody. From the read, it seems like
his ego is getting in the way. And it's funny that, considering he hasn't done
much noteworthy otherwise.

~~~
axod
Instead of attacking them with "smug pricks" and "complete ass", read their
reasoning. Look at the code.

 _Do_ you want your js to be creating functions all the time? _Is_ it worth
it?

My personal stance, is that you simply don't need a javascript library. The
browser differences are very small, and not rocket science to work with.
Learning javascript > learning jquery | prototype | etc

I agree though, people build cool stuff with jquery. This thread is just
people pointing out that if you care how fast your webapp runs, or how much
memory it uses, then using a library is probably a bad idea.

~~~
evgen
I think the problem here is that there are still people who think that a 1-5%
performance difference on a webapp means anything at all. I would trade 5% of
my app performance for 5% more code out of developers any day of the week.
jQuery and other libraries my an inefficient "crutch", but if lets a coder get
the job done in one or two lines instead of 50 the crutch is worth the cost.

~~~
axod
That's a really really short term view. Which may be appropriate for some
things, but not for others.

------
dxjones
If jQuery is open source, and you look at the source, and you see room for
improvement. ... improve it. ... or make a constructive criticism pointing out
_how_ it could be improved and someone else will do it.

Could the code be faster? Sure. People often analyze libraries, identify a
critical path that is limiting performance, and then zero in on the offending
the code ... and then _improve_ it.

I think it's find the author goes on a bit of a rant. Perhaps he'll inspire a
few coders (or Resig himself) to address some of the criticisms by revising
the code, and then everyone benefits.

------
unconed
jQuery's own code is not so developer friendly, sure, but that doesn't change
the fact that it has revolutionized JavaScript development in the browser for
a lot of people. Before you criticize it, it also helps to understand jQuery's
design goals: to be small, to be fast, to get out of your way and just "do
what you mean".

A lot of its own code is hard to read exactly because it makes the code that
uses it ridiculously compact and easy to read (e.g. liberal use of function
overloading). In order to keep the library small, some of this code is not as
clear and verbose as it should probably be.

However, jQuery is made by people who live and breathe JavaScript code. They
use patterns that can look utterly foreign to people used to more conventional
imperative languages (like logical operator short circuiting), but which are
actually more readable if you know what it's doing.

As for performance, he points out a lot of things like "creating tons of
functions on the fly" and "instantiating new objects for everything", but he
doesn't actually prove that any of these points cause performance issues. It
should be as simple as rewriting the code to get rid of these 'obvious'
deficiencies and then benchmarking it. Which this person has not done.

I'll trust John Resig, the guy who is being paid by Mozilla to work on
JavaScript full time, over some random internet dude with a chip on his
shoulder.

------
CalmQuiet
A Feb 6, 2009, dissing of Resig. (if that's what your web dev world needs)

~~~
billymeltdown
Yeah, I'm not feeling it either.

Although it is funny when the flame baiters start calling each other "wannabe"
in the thread.

------
embeddedradical
he pointed out a few good places where the code could be cleaned up.

resig: i hope that you see this post, ignore the flamebait, and notice how the
suggestions don't look too bad to fix up. also, thanks for jquery -- it's
awesome.

------
minalecs
perfect example of .. jealousy. His points may be valid, but he needs to show
some respect for what Resig has accomplished.

------
Semiapies
I wouldn't say this is a reddit link, naturally, but perhaps there needs to be
an aggregator for random bits of nerd-rage with no significant value.

------
jblomo
What's the best alternative? I've heard much the same things about Prototype.

------
loincloth
Just a great big yawn. Use it or don't. Next.

