13 ms·
JQuery 3.4.0 Released
- taesu 8y agoJQuery will be always in a special place in my heart.
- progx 8y agoLike my old Atari 2600.
- BaconJuice 8y agoAlways. It was powerful for its time in terms of capabilities and I got so much done with it. We still have some old apps running Jquery in production with no issues. I miss it sometimes haha
- lowken10 8y agoJQuery should be taken out back and shot!
- fatbird 8y agoYou have forgotten the face of your father.
- austincheney 8y agoI have no idea what that means.
- inyorgroove 8y agoIts a reference to The Dark Tower https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dark_Tower_(series) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dark_Tower_(series)
- butterfi 8y ago"You have forgotten your history" is how I would interpret that.
- krapp 8y agoWhy? It's battle tested, stable, does what it says on the tin and has a sane and intuitive interface. Is there any objective reason not to use it, other than it no longer being hip?
- ken 8y agoMost of its functionality is built into every modern browser. As the 3.4.0 release notes observe, for example: > "Now that many of these selectors have made their way into modern browsers, it’s almost time to say goodbye to Sizzle. [...] When we remove Sizzle, we’ll replace it with a small wrapper around querySelectorAll" jQuery does have a nice interface. Fortunately, it's almost exactly the same as the native JS/DOM interface that every browser offers for free these days.
- iambateman 8y agoIt’s approaching the same because jQuery spent a decade setting expectations about how the world should be.
- peteforde 8y ago"almost exactly the same" http://youmightnotneedjquery.com/ http://youmightnotneedjquery.com/ I'm sorry, but with remarkably few exceptions, everything on the left is way nicer than everything on the right.
- ken 8y agoThat’s why I said “modern browsers”. You linked to a page with compatibility equivalents for unsupported versions of a discontinued web browser.
- peteforde 8y agoI'm confident that they would appreciate a pull request for your suggested updates. It remains a frequently cited resource for these sorts of discussions; if you feel it no longer reflects the status quo, it's important that you consider being part of the solution.
- mythrwy 8y agoI haven't used jQuery in awhile but positional selectors being removed is a pretty big change. FTA Specifically, jQuery 3.4.0 is deprecating :first, :last, :eq, :even, :odd, :lt, :gt, and :nth
- panarky 8y ago> Keep in mind we will still support the positional methods, such as .first, .last, and .eq. Anything you can do with positional selectors, you can do with positional methods instead. They perform better anyway.
- hinkley 8y agoExcept half of the point of css selectors was that you strongly encouraged your coworkers to use similar selectors for style and behavior. Now you have two implementations of the same thing and over a long enough time horizon that always breaks.
- masklinn 8y ago> Anything you can do with positional selectors, you can do with positional methods instead. With nowhere near the convenience and clarity of selectors e.g. $("foo bar:first baz qux") or event delegation.
- dustindiamond 8y agoThat would definitely break some stuff for me. Lots of first, last, and even, odd usage.
- thrownaway954 8y agoIt's kind of cool that the first post on jQuery blog was from Leah Silber in August of 1997. http://blog.jquery.com/1997/08/ http://blog.jquery.com/1997/08/
- localhostdotdev 8y agojust a simple reminder: Top 1m 77.15% Top 100k 87.37% Top 10k 88.83% https://trends.builtwith.com/javascript/jQuery https://trends.builtwith.com/javascript/jQuery
- ehsankia 8y agoInterestingly enough, if you uncheck Top 1m and look at either 100k or 10k, you can see the start of the drop since 2017.
- vanderZwan 8y agoI wonder if the lack of updates affects that. No new exposure or new things to get excited about.
- PhilDunphy23 8y agoIf you have jQuery on your website alongside Google Analytics, you’re loading two jQuery libraries without you knowing due to Google using it too on their analytics script.
- joshstrange 8y agoDo you have a source on this? I can't believe this is true and my 2-3 google searches say it's not.
- PhilDunphy23 8y agohttps://www.googletagmanager.com/gtag/js https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtag/js Search “jQuery” in there, first result will be the copyright comment plus the version.
- localhostdotdev 8y agoit doesn't export to the global namespace though: <script src="https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtag/js"></script> <script>$</script> ReferenceError: $ is not defined <script>jQuery</script> ReferenceError: jQuery is not defined
- peteforde 8y agoEvery time I use jQuery after helping my friends battle Reactive monsters, I am so eternally grateful that I have such a productive and satisfying tool at my disposal. It requires zero bike-shedding and almost every imaginable edge-case is solved before I start. If it ends up sucking, it's because I made it suck. Just to abuse metaphors, I believe that jQuery is a "bicycle for the mind" in the true Steve Jobs sense. If you don't love it, please knock yourself out or try an edgier SPA. Spend all of your free time learning how Hooks just made everything you were excited about obsolete. The pool is warm and the weather is lovely, friends.
- KajMagnus 8y agoI migrated from jQuery to React, never going back and I wouldn't use jQuery for a new project. I agree that jQuery is ok for simple things, however I'd probably prefer something more light weight, like Bliss.js instead. jQuery's 30kb bundle size does make pages load slightly slightly slower on mobile phones, in comparison to Bliss (about 3kb last time I checked).
- sebazzz 8y agoMigrate from jQuery to React. You make it sound trivial but it is essentially a complete new way of developing the front-end. Not necessarily a SPA, but certainly a front-end with more interactivity than a few buttons and dialogs. In my experience React front-ends are more driven by separate data retrieved and stored at the server, while jQuery front-ends are mostly server-side rendered and jQuery is used for some degree of dynamic flexibility.
- austincheney 8y agoHave you considered authoring code without either of those tools? Then you can independently add in the appropriate tool to adjust for efficiency. Thinking in terms of the tooling first is premature optimization. Focus on the end product first, and the correct tooling (if any) will be clear.
- 8y ago
- maxpert 8y agoLoved it then love it now. The fact that it was most loved library on Stackoverflow should say something about the relentless simplicity of jQuery.
- perttir 8y agoIt is a tool that make some jobs easier. Just like vue/react is an tool which makes some jobs easier. You just need to know when to pick the right tool for the job.
- _the_inflator 8y agoThere is so much we can be grateful for jQuery. It was the first JS platform (plugins) and had a huge impact on the DOM API. Without jQuery there would not be any BackboneJS, AngularJS etc. jQuery got its niche today. Still the best for simple one-off landingpages.
- dagw 8y agoLast year I started a fairly big new web app after a few years away from web development and started out wanting to not use JQuery since I knew that was what the cool kids where doing. But everywhere I turned I kept bumping into libraries or widgets I wanted to use that wanted to pull in JQuery as a dependency. And most of the times any JQuery-free alternative I could find wasn't as feature complete or didn't quite work the way I wanted it to. Eventually I just gave up included JQuery.
- steve_adams_86 8y agoI feel like so many people lamenting jQuery might be remembering the pain and frustration of dealing with the monstrosities people built with the library rather than the library itself. As libraries go I think jQuery's one of the nicer ones I've used. I don't use it now, but it's pretty good software in my books and I'm glad it was there when I needed it.
- mekkkkkk 8y agoThis is so true. jQuery is really a fantastic library, but it gets dragged in the mud because of the applications of it. What people forget is that the adoption of SPA's preceded the widespread use of modern SPA-centric frameworks that we use today (duh). jQuery was the defacto standard library for web development before this transition, and naturally devs crowbarred together SPA behemoths using it. It turns out that it was not the ideal tool for that job, but it WAS (and still is) the perfect tool for the kind of lightweight interactivity that it was originally designed for. Sorry for repeating your point in so many words, but the hate towards jQuery really gets me down.
- code_duck 8y agoThe hate for jQuery has to be from people who never used Prototype and Mootools, and think that React and Vue have existed since the beginning of time. jQuery was very useful back in those days, and pretty much everyone but David Mark agreed.
- BilalBudhani 8y agoI still write applications where I don't need modern frameworks like Vue/React at all. These apps follow traditional framework generating HTML, it makes so much sense to just add jQuery to enhance the user experience by sprinkling JS snippets. I believe there is a use case of every technology. There are use cases where React/Vue makes sense, similarly, there are still use cases where jQuery can be useful.
- onion2k 8y agoI still write applications where I don't need modern frameworks like Vue/React at all. jQuery is not an alternative to React or Vue. It's an alternative to vanilla JS. When you're writing something that doesn't obviously need everything a reactive app framework like React offers the question you need to be asking isn't "Do I need React or do I only need jQuery?", it's simply "Do I need jQuery?". These days, unless you need to support very old browsers, most of the time the jQuery code isn't that much simpler than writing plain old JS.
- neokantian 8y agoJQuery is an alternative to React or Vue. JQuery is philosophically another approach to solving the same problem. JQuery offers you functions to call without telling you how to write your program. JQuery is a philosophy about respect, and about not knowing better, because you actually know that you don't.
- petepete 8y agoAs is plain old JavaScript. React and Vue are geared towards solving a specific part of that problem. Without a very good reason, most developers shouldn't be trying to solve the problems Vue and React solve in jQuery/JS. Of course, some will want to and nothing's stopping them, but I wouldn't recommend it for _normal_ projects.
- onion2k 8y agoWithout a very good reason, most developers shouldn't be trying to solve the problems Vue and React solve in jQuery/JS. That's a much clearer way of explaining the point I was trying to make.
- joaodlf 8y agoRemember when knowing JQuery put you at the forefront of frontend development? Actually, in those days, "frontend" wasn't really a thing yet. JQuery just made you a more competent web developer.
- neokantian 8y agoI really like JQuery! It is just a library in which you call functions. It does not tell you how to write your code. It is not one of those frankenmonster frameworks that sucks you dry and tells you what to do. I am not going to name what obnoxious framework it is about, but I am waiting for another year or two before they unceremoniously abandon that stuff and start hyping the next Messiah framework.
- submeta 8y agoWhenever I review legacy (PHP) code from say 2010/2011 with lots of jQuery, I realize what a relief it is to use frontend frameworks / libraries. There was a reason why those frameworks were developed. And that does not go away just because it feels right when I spin up a Django project and start using jQuery to make my views / templates more dynamic. Eventually when that project grows larger, I realize that going that path won‘t cut it.
- EnderMB 8y agoJavaScript has moved on considerably over the past decade, but any time I have to write any JS I still yearn for the simple syntax of jQuery. Obviously, the abstractions were what made jQuery what it is, and what made it so powerful, but I wish that vanilla JS were to take a leaf out of jQuery's book and adopt some of its syntax ideas.
- ndnxhs 8y agoI dont hate jQuery but I just find it useless for modern web dev. If you can ignore internet explorer you can do everything jquey did with just vanilla js. I tried vuejs recently for a little interactive page on my website and found it revolutionary compared to jquery.
- noir_lord 8y ago> If you can ignore internet explorer you can do everything jquey did with just vanilla js. There are still lots of people who can't sadly. That said while yes you can do everything jQuery does in vanilla JS (jQuery is written in vanilla JS after all) you often end up with more code than using jquery which means more to read through, more to understand. So saying it is useless is a bit harsh, it may be useless for you but it's not for many and if you look at what the jquery folks are doing with deprecations you can see they are refactoring jquery to use the vanilla js stuff that was added in large part because of jquery so it'll likely definite itself out of existence at some point anyway.
- xx4xx4 8y agois this still a thing?
- jesusthatsgreat 8y agoI prefer jQuery syntax than javascript. It's the only thing I miss about jQuery. I also think there's a lot of people still using jQuery simply because they're scared of SPAs, the learning curve involved and how they basically change the role of a front end dev to more of a fullstack dev. I once considered myself a front end dev but these days I'm using SPAs, running NodeJS, pulling & managing data from REST APIs, sending / retrieving stuff from a database, managing NoSQL database, using serverless functions, working with websockets and GraphQL etc.. Am I still considered a front end developer? Because I know front end developers who still carve a living out of HTML / CSS / jQuery alone. They'd be toast when it comes to present day job interviews for example for front end positions. It just seems like we need to split 'front end developer' in to about 3 or 4 levels to better represent people's skillset / what's expected of them.
- macca321 8y agoThere's a huge element when working with SPA developers of reinventing the wheels that the browser and HTTP provide.
- dajonker 8y agoI'm not necessarily scared of SPAs (I actually work with React myself), but I do believe them to be overkill in lots of cases. One nice thing about them is you can enforce a hard boundary between frontend and backend. Although with some discipline you could do the same with a single backend framework.
- elliotec 8y agoDid anybody look at the website on mobile? Embarrassing!
- helpme420 8y agoinhales deeply HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHA
- DanielBMarkham 8y agoI keep walking into shops and look at a god-awful mess on the screen, with complex builds, state, unit-tests, and all kinds of other stuff that come together to create an app. Then I look at these same apps and realize that there's something like a 20-to-1 ratio between all of that and the simplest possible solution, which many times (but not all) involves JQuery. Hey, if whatever works for you is awesome, please carry on. But if you're behind schedule, the SPA is too slow, the users say it's buggy, most of your devs couldn't manipulate the DOM directly if they were forced to, and the lead just spent until midnight getting the build working right, then you might want to start examining some of your development and architecture choices. I love tools and abstraction frameworks -- right until the time they start taking over more time, effort, and learning than just pounding a solution out in something like JQuery would. I'm glad the update is out. Looking forward to playing around with it some ... the next time I need something as full-featured as it is. With greenfield development, we start with zero stuff and carefully justify each addition after that.
- anthony_doan 8y agoI use Bootstrap 4.3 for my side project and I still find myself enjoying jQuery. It's a great library and I am thankful for the people who have made and contribute to it. I've used it during my web development career years ago before client side rendering was a thing. I believe if they were to meet their goal of modernizing it, jQuery will be going on much longer regardless of other framework out there.
- pier25 8y agoA couple of months ago I had to implement a drag and drop thing from scratch in React and I really missed jQuery. Reactive data with vdom is nice for some use cases, but sometimes the best solution is to manipulate the dom directly. Does anyone know of some library that can mix the two approaches?
- pxtail 8y agoI always find it weird that everyone is bashing jQuery nowadays and offers Ract/Vue as replacement - isn't React/Vue working with blank slate and injecting page content into container? jQuery usually works as "enhancement" for page content actually returned from server Are you all building websites like that? Returning blank page from server and then filling all content on client side?
- manishsharan 8y agoLove Jquery -- but hate Jquery slim build. Let's say you create a widget that expects jquery animate or ajax for some functionality. You publish your widget and users who use your widget like it and then they try to optimize page load time by using Jquery slim. And all of a sudden , some parts of your widget are working and some are not.
- altern8 8y agoBuilding and most importanly maintaining jQuery apps is an absolute nightmare that I hope I will never have to experience again. However, jQuery apps built 10 years ago still work flawlessly and updating plugins generally doesn't break the app. Newer solutions like React change so much that if you have an app that you built and left there without updating it chances are after 1-2 years it won't even compile without replacing components that are no longer available.