4 ms·

I kind of imagine we will one day have a basic poly fill for all the cross platform issues jQuery actually excels at, and then we truly won’t need jQuery since

by sbjs 8y ago

I kind of imagine we will one day have a basic poly fill for all the cross platform issues jQuery actually excels at, and then we truly won’t need jQuery since that’s all it’s really good at these days. Things like chaining are an anti pattern and lead to brittle code!

brailsafe 8y ago
I think those are some broad generalizations that I can't agree with, but Sizzle might be what you're looking for. https://github.com/jquery/sizzle/wiki https://github.com/jquery/sizzle/wiki
- floatboth 8y ago
  Sizzle is ancient history at this point. It's the selector engine jQuery used before querySelector became available everywhere.
  - brailsafe 8y ago
    Yes, that was the point. What did you think I thought Sizzle was?
    - floatboth 8y ago
      "might be what you're looking for", when that person was looking for a "basic poly fill for all the cross platform issues jQuery actually excels at"
      - brailsafe 8y ago
        Exactly rice. A possible answer to a somewhat ambiguous desire.
emodendroket 8y ago
I don't think I can agree with that idea about chaining.
Piskvorrr 8y ago
Oh, but we already do have that, over there: https://jquery.com/ https://jquery.com/ What's with the trend "jQ is old, old is bad! We need something that does the same thing, and most importantly is not named jQuery"?
- AmericanChopper 8y ago
  Most DOM manipulation in jQuery goes through jQuery.globalEval, which uses eval(). Meaning if you want to have a CSP, you have to allow unsafe-eval if you need to support jQuery. CSP is an incredibly useful tool, and it’s close to impossible to use it properly with jQuery.
  - lmm 8y ago
    First concrete, legitimate reason I've seen all thread. Is there something fundamental about jQuery's design that forces it to use eval(), or is it possible a new version could avoids that?
    - AmericanChopper 8y ago
      Performing evals is a core part of the design. Take a look at the additional notes section on this documentation of the .html method. http://api.jquery.com/html/ http://api.jquery.com/html/ >By design, any jQuery constructor or method that accepts an HTML string — jQuery(), .append(), .after(), etc. — can potentially execute code This makes jQuery less safe in general, but I think the CSP restrictions this puts in place are probably a greater issue for most people. I’ve been involved in retro-fitting strict CSPs into a few projects, and more than once I’ve been thwarted by very minor use of jQuery in a couple of places.
      - sbjs 8y ago
        It's part of the design of the creation of new elements. But that's just one part of jQuery, and a part I would be completely okay with jQuery getting rid of.

by sbjs 8y ago

brailsafe 8y ago

I think those are some broad generalizations that I can't agree with, but Sizzle might be what you're looking for. https://github.com/jquery/sizzle/wiki https://github.com/jquery/sizzle/wiki

floatboth 8y ago
Sizzle is ancient history at this point. It's the selector engine jQuery used before querySelector became available everywhere.
- brailsafe 8y ago
  Yes, that was the point. What did you think I thought Sizzle was?
  - floatboth 8y ago
    "might be what you're looking for", when that person was looking for a "basic poly fill for all the cross platform issues jQuery actually excels at"
    - brailsafe 8y ago
      Exactly rice. A possible answer to a somewhat ambiguous desire.

emodendroket 8y ago

I don't think I can agree with that idea about chaining.

Piskvorrr 8y ago

Oh, but we already do have that, over there: https://jquery.com/ https://jquery.com/ What's with the trend "jQ is old, old is bad! We need something that does the same thing, and most importantly is not named jQuery"?

AmericanChopper 8y ago
Most DOM manipulation in jQuery goes through jQuery.globalEval, which uses eval(). Meaning if you want to have a CSP, you have to allow unsafe-eval if you need to support jQuery. CSP is an incredibly useful tool, and it’s close to impossible to use it properly with jQuery.
- lmm 8y ago
  First concrete, legitimate reason I've seen all thread. Is there something fundamental about jQuery's design that forces it to use eval(), or is it possible a new version could avoids that?
  - AmericanChopper 8y ago
    Performing evals is a core part of the design. Take a look at the additional notes section on this documentation of the .html method. http://api.jquery.com/html/ http://api.jquery.com/html/ >By design, any jQuery constructor or method that accepts an HTML string — jQuery(), .append(), .after(), etc. — can potentially execute code This makes jQuery less safe in general, but I think the CSP restrictions this puts in place are probably a greater issue for most people. I’ve been involved in retro-fitting strict CSPs into a few projects, and more than once I’ve been thwarted by very minor use of jQuery in a couple of places.
    - sbjs 8y ago
      It's part of the design of the creation of new elements. But that's just one part of jQuery, and a part I would be completely okay with jQuery getting rid of.