4 ms·
Looks more lightweight now, but still it's 12k LOC vs 1k LOC in Backbone. Need to look through, what do those 11k offer :) Pure JS and drop-in integration is g
by lapusta 15y ago
Looks more lightweight now, but still it's 12k LOC vs 1k LOC in Backbone. Need to look through, what do those 11k offer :)
Pure JS and drop-in integration is good too, we are a Java shop and lots of developers working on Windows, so introducing a Ruby-dependent JS framework would be hard in my case.
Previously we also considered SC as a 'heavy' JS solution - like Cappuccino, ExtJS or GWT(we used GWT for complex backends - it allowed us to share UI&server code), but now we'll have another look at it as an alternative to Backbone for frontends/mobile.
- mbesto 15y agoI'm helping a colleague of mine get into a RIA start-up and the original development he used ASP MVC on Windows. Do you know if any of the RIA JS frameworks play nicely with ASP MVC?
- dogonwheels 15y agoHow about Knockout? So it's not a 'full' RIA JS framework, but in my mind, that's no bad thing: http://knockoutjs.com/ http://knockoutjs.com/ It feels like a nice fit to MVC/MS stuff (there's certainly plenty of examples of this, and Steve Sanderson now works for MS). And it's easy to bind whatever UI you want to your view models. Personally I now use KO for even the smallest of JS/HTML 'apps'. It's lovely :)
- nxn 15y agoI've used ExtJS with ASP.NET MVC for a few years, and it was quite nice. Just have the controller functions return JSON serialized data instead of a regular view. If decoupling the UI from the server side portion of the app isn't a concern you can also use Ext.Direct, which will allow you to call your server side controller methods from JavaScript by just doing: ControllerName.FunctionName(arg0, arg1, callbackFn);