4 ms·

Clearly it's highly biased because it's not a newspaper article, it's a post on what I think. > People wouldn't query the DOM if that wasn't the most effective

Clearly it's highly biased because it's not a newspaper article, it's a post on what I think. > People wouldn't query the DOM if that wasn't the most effective way of getting stuff done. jQuery has a UI kit, it's called jQuery UI. And how is using jQuery equals to not using JavaScript to the fullest? Have you ever used Gmail? Or MobileMe? Or any of the world class web applications built without jQuery? At no point did I say jQuery was invalid, and jQuery UI is a prime example of where I want the web to go. With it, you use jQuery to find the elements you want to work with, and then you use and object based hierarchal to enhance them and work entirely in Javascript, above the DOM. See http://jqueryui.com/demos/slider/#slider-vertical http://jqueryui.com/demos/slider/#slider-vertical, a prime example. The code selects the slider, and then uses $.slider to perform all the meat of the problem. Selecting the element is a mere convenience, the cool stuff is done by the UI kit. > The author said "using JavaScript to the fullest" and now the author tells us to create "extendable view classes" in JavaScript. JavaScript is a prototypical language, you can't use it to the "fullest" if you force OOP on it. Use whatever programming paradigm you like. HN wouldn't accept a comment listing all the successful JS frameworks that use class based inheritance because it would be too long. > If desktop apps are so good, then how come web apps are still around? Your understanding of web development may be amiss, how the tables have turned! Web apps are around because of the delivery mechanism: the web. Not because they offer astounding experiences compared to a hypothetical desktop counterpart, but because cloud storage and scaling, always on availability, and browser ubiquity can be leveraged by users for great gains. Web application developers constantly struggle to provide the "native" experience while leveraging all the benefits of the web, but its hard, hence the post. I do however understand your desire to keep using jQuery. As mentioned below, its an extraordinary tool that it seems you and I both use religiously. However, I have found that its hard to scale up a large complex client side app using only jQuery, and I and seemingly many other feel the need for more structured frameworks to leverage in that domain. Do you disagree? edited to remove unwarranted hate

DjDarkman 16y ago
> HN wouldn't accept a comment listing all the successful JS frameworks that use class based inheritance because it would be too long. That certainly doesn't mean that class-based ones are the most successful. > Your understanding of web development may be amiss, how the tables have turned! Web apps are around because of the delivery mechanism: the web. Not because they offer astounding experiences compared to a hypothetical desktop counterpart, but because cloud storage and scaling, always on availability, and browser ubiquity can be leveraged by users for great gains. Web application developers constantly struggle to provide the "native" experience while leveraging all the benefits of the web, but its hard, hence the post. The browser would be long dead if it wasn't for JavaScript. > an extraordinary tool Agreed. > you and I both use religiously There is no religion on my part, it simply gets the job done, and allows me to focus on architecting my application instead of DOM bugs. > However, I have found that its hard to scale up a large complex client side app using only jQuery, and I and seemingly many other feel the need for more structured frameworks to leverage in that domain. Do you disagree? This is not a yes or no question, it depends on what's the problem, as I said in another comment, it's really easy to fix your dual validation problem, by writing a small micro framework, if there isn't one out there yet. It has become really easy to bridge the server and the client. You could abstract away any problem, but you shouldn't get too carried away with hierarchies, JavaScript is a semi-interpreted language and as I said, it's more function and prototypical than object(class) oriented .I agree that web development is hard, but as I said earlier, it's hard because of archaic browsers.

DjDarkman 16y ago

> HN wouldn't accept a comment listing all the successful JS frameworks that use class based inheritance because it would be too long. That certainly doesn't mean that class-based ones are the most successful. > Your understanding of web development may be amiss, how the tables have turned! Web apps are around because of the delivery mechanism: the web. Not because they offer astounding experiences compared to a hypothetical desktop counterpart, but because cloud storage and scaling, always on availability, and browser ubiquity can be leveraged by users for great gains. Web application developers constantly struggle to provide the "native" experience while leveraging all the benefits of the web, but its hard, hence the post. The browser would be long dead if it wasn't for JavaScript. > an extraordinary tool Agreed. > you and I both use religiously There is no religion on my part, it simply gets the job done, and allows me to focus on architecting my application instead of DOM bugs. > However, I have found that its hard to scale up a large complex client side app using only jQuery, and I and seemingly many other feel the need for more structured frameworks to leverage in that domain. Do you disagree? This is not a yes or no question, it depends on what's the problem, as I said in another comment, it's really easy to fix your dual validation problem, by writing a small micro framework, if there isn't one out there yet. It has become really easy to bridge the server and the client. You could abstract away any problem, but you shouldn't get too carried away with hierarchies, JavaScript is a semi-interpreted language and as I said, it's more function and prototypical than object(class) oriented .I agree that web development is hard, but as I said earlier, it's hard because of archaic browsers.