7 ms·

> This has been rolled into the Javascript document api via document.querySelector, and document.querySelectorAll. Have you actually compared the two methods

> This has been rolled into the Javascript document api via document.querySelector, and document.querySelectorAll. Have you actually compared the two methods in a real website? It's like saying why use Ruby when you can use Java. The Javascript document API is super verbose. No thanks.

frabert 6y ago
How so? Who stops you from doing something like `const $ = document.querySelector`?
- cphoover 6y ago
  Good point
- Epskampie 6y ago
  There's a ton of other functions you need like element.addEventListener, insertAdjacentElement, XMLHttpRequest (when you need progress) etc. etc. At that point you might as well save yourself and the person after you a major headache and just use jQuery whose API everybody knows.
- cortesoft 6y ago
  The big magic of jQuery is that you can act on an array of elements as if it were a single element. Your alias does not give you that at all.
cphoover 6y ago
You don't have to use all of it though, right? You can choose to only only use the applicable parts: eg: ``` $('.container-element') .addClass('active'); // vs document.querySelectorAll('.my-class-selector') .classList.add('active') ``` I use the native APIs all the time, they are not that complicated or overly verbose. Easily memorized with practice IMHO. Also they are all extremely well documented on MDN.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- lhorie 6y ago
  Technically that breaks, you want: document.querySelectorAll('.my-class-selector').forEach(el => el.classList.add('active')) Personally I use the native APIs because they aren't that hard to use (most of them, anyways) and I tend to be OCD about bundle sizes, but to each their own, I suppose.
  - megous 6y ago
    Yeah, oh so many years ago I realized that I use just a small subset of jQuery, and just rewrote those bits, to avoid having to inject whole of jQuery into all pages that I browse (I had some global https?://* userscripts, so I was basically injecting jQuery into every single page and frame). https://megous.com/dl/tmp/basic.js https://megous.com/dl/tmp/basic.js 1.3kB compressed. Much better. :) And I avoided having to rewrite my extensions with platform APIs. That was before FF killed all the joy in writing userscripts for me, because I was no longer able to install and update them just by copying them to mozilla folder and had to invoke a lot of clicking ceremony to just get my 20 scripts or so from git into firefox past the webextension limitations on storage/access to mozilla folder.
    - akie 6y ago
      You should totally open-source that, put it on NPM, and write an article or so about it.
      - megous 6y ago
        Everyone will have different set of methods they use. Point of this is that if you need some method you can just add it in in 4-5 lines or remove one you don't need. So it's not the best fit for NPM. It's good fit for good old copy/paste into a project, if you're optimizing for size/memory use. :)
  - maple3142 6y ago
Kaze404 6y ago
Conversely, looking at how you do it through jQuery after seeing how it is in Javascript gives me the same reaction. The fact that jQuery is usually assigned to the dollar sign definitely doesn't help, especially for beginners. The amount of questions I've answered that stemmed from a fundamental misunderstanding of how Javascript works, all because they learned jQuery instead of Javascript, is pretty significant.
- mettamage 6y ago
  I remember when I was in uni that the $() must've had a special meaning or something. I was pretty convinced that the $ was some tough mathematical operator or computer science concept that I didn't yet understand. When I learned that it was simply a function invocation that returned a jQuery object so you could chain it, I was absolutely shocked about the simplicity of that statement. Beginning developers sure like to project their cognitive insecurities onto programming. Or at least, I did :)
  - macintux 6y ago
    There's so much magic in programming that as a beginner, it's hard to know which magic you should dig deeper into, vs which is such a treacherous rabbit hole you're better off cargo culting.
    - bigfudge 6y ago
      It think this is true of many technical things. Statistics, sailing, car mechanics, photography... What I love about HN is it often gives clues as to which are the interesting rabbit holes.
- cosmotic 6y ago
  That argument stands true for most frameworks on most platforms. I prefer the dollar sign; it's pervasive and concise.
  - Kaze404 6y ago
bilekas 6y ago
> The Javascript document API is super verbose. Can't say I've ever heard that as an issue before.. Also I think the main point was there are so many better frameworks that manage the DOM better than jQuery as the need has evolved. I'll always have fond memories of jQuery but I don't see it as my go-to anymore, by a long shot.
runj__ 6y ago
I'm still a little bit sad we got fetch as part of javascript when the request module had such a great interface. I still prefer the look of it. https://www.npmjs.com/package/request https://www.npmjs.com/package/request

frabert 6y ago

How so? Who stops you from doing something like `const $ = document.querySelector`?

cphoover 6y ago
Good point
Epskampie 6y ago
There's a ton of other functions you need like element.addEventListener, insertAdjacentElement, XMLHttpRequest (when you need progress) etc. etc. At that point you might as well save yourself and the person after you a major headache and just use jQuery whose API everybody knows.
cortesoft 6y ago
The big magic of jQuery is that you can act on an array of elements as if it were a single element. Your alias does not give you that at all.

cphoover 6y ago

You don't have to use all of it though, right? You can choose to only only use the applicable parts: eg: ``` $('.container-element') .addClass('active'); // vs document.querySelectorAll('.my-class-selector') .classList.add('active') ``` I use the native APIs all the time, they are not that complicated or overly verbose. Easily memorized with practice IMHO. Also they are all extremely well documented on MDN.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
lhorie 6y ago
Technically that breaks, you want: document.querySelectorAll('.my-class-selector').forEach(el => el.classList.add('active')) Personally I use the native APIs because they aren't that hard to use (most of them, anyways) and I tend to be OCD about bundle sizes, but to each their own, I suppose.
- megous 6y ago
  Yeah, oh so many years ago I realized that I use just a small subset of jQuery, and just rewrote those bits, to avoid having to inject whole of jQuery into all pages that I browse (I had some global https?://* userscripts, so I was basically injecting jQuery into every single page and frame). https://megous.com/dl/tmp/basic.js https://megous.com/dl/tmp/basic.js 1.3kB compressed. Much better. :) And I avoided having to rewrite my extensions with platform APIs. That was before FF killed all the joy in writing userscripts for me, because I was no longer able to install and update them just by copying them to mozilla folder and had to invoke a lot of clicking ceremony to just get my 20 scripts or so from git into firefox past the webextension limitations on storage/access to mozilla folder.
  - akie 6y ago
    You should totally open-source that, put it on NPM, and write an article or so about it.
    - megous 6y ago
      Everyone will have different set of methods they use. Point of this is that if you need some method you can just add it in in 4-5 lines or remove one you don't need. So it's not the best fit for NPM. It's good fit for good old copy/paste into a project, if you're optimizing for size/memory use. :)
- maple3142 6y ago

Kaze404 6y ago

Conversely, looking at how you do it through jQuery after seeing how it is in Javascript gives me the same reaction. The fact that jQuery is usually assigned to the dollar sign definitely doesn't help, especially for beginners. The amount of questions I've answered that stemmed from a fundamental misunderstanding of how Javascript works, all because they learned jQuery instead of Javascript, is pretty significant.

mettamage 6y ago
I remember when I was in uni that the $() must've had a special meaning or something. I was pretty convinced that the $ was some tough mathematical operator or computer science concept that I didn't yet understand. When I learned that it was simply a function invocation that returned a jQuery object so you could chain it, I was absolutely shocked about the simplicity of that statement. Beginning developers sure like to project their cognitive insecurities onto programming. Or at least, I did :)
- macintux 6y ago
  There's so much magic in programming that as a beginner, it's hard to know which magic you should dig deeper into, vs which is such a treacherous rabbit hole you're better off cargo culting.
  - bigfudge 6y ago
    It think this is true of many technical things. Statistics, sailing, car mechanics, photography... What I love about HN is it often gives clues as to which are the interesting rabbit holes.
cosmotic 6y ago
That argument stands true for most frameworks on most platforms. I prefer the dollar sign; it's pervasive and concise.
- Kaze404 6y ago

bilekas 6y ago

> The Javascript document API is super verbose. Can't say I've ever heard that as an issue before.. Also I think the main point was there are so many better frameworks that manage the DOM better than jQuery as the need has evolved. I'll always have fond memories of jQuery but I don't see it as my go-to anymore, by a long shot.

runj__ 6y ago

I'm still a little bit sad we got fetch as part of javascript when the request module had such a great interface. I still prefer the look of it. https://www.npmjs.com/package/request https://www.npmjs.com/package/request