7 ms·

What I have seen of jQuery falls into two camps, people who use it instead of basic DOM code like document.getElementBy Id, and horrible ungodly spaghetti code.

What I have seen of jQuery falls into two camps, people who use it instead of basic DOM code like document.getElementBy Id, and horrible ungodly spaghetti code. Funny how all the jQuery fanboys are quick to downvote, question my knowlege, and ignore my question simultaneously.

masklinn 15y ago
> Funny how all the jQuery fanboys are quick to downvote, question my knowlege, and ignore my question simultaneously. The only "questions" you asked are 1. whether people still use jQuery (it's one of the most popular DOM-manipulation libraries out there and growing) and whether jQuery has a future, in the middle of confused ranting betraying a deep lack of familiarity not only with the library itself (which can be excused) but with the purpose and role of that library as well (which really can't, at least do your homework). > question my knowlege One can only question your knowledge when you consistently demonstrate a complete lack thereof.
- moomin 15y ago
  I think jQuery's got life in it for as long as IE has > 5% market share.
  - masklinn 15y ago
    You're underestimating the appeal of sheer convenience. jQuery is convenient because it's terse, it's expressive and it has bloatloads of community support. Most "standard" javascript APIs (especially the W3C DOM) are absolutely dreadful to work with, especially if you like modern javascript (a smalltalk-ish blend of "functional" and object-oriented javascript). If IE falls under 5% of market share (not like it'll ever happen), jQuery will simply remove the now-irrelevant pieces of code. My proof for this is simple: http://zeptojs.com/ http://zeptojs.com/ This is a 5k library aiming to implement the full jQuery API while restricting its compatibility to mobile webkit browsers. As long as there is more than a single browser (and each Webkit port out there counts as a supplementary browser), jQuery will thrive.

masklinn 15y ago

> Funny how all the jQuery fanboys are quick to downvote, question my knowlege, and ignore my question simultaneously. The only "questions" you asked are 1. whether people still use jQuery (it's one of the most popular DOM-manipulation libraries out there and growing) and whether jQuery has a future, in the middle of confused ranting betraying a deep lack of familiarity not only with the library itself (which can be excused) but with the purpose and role of that library as well (which really can't, at least do your homework). > question my knowlege One can only question your knowledge when you consistently demonstrate a complete lack thereof.

moomin 15y ago
I think jQuery's got life in it for as long as IE has > 5% market share.
- masklinn 15y ago
  You're underestimating the appeal of sheer convenience. jQuery is convenient because it's terse, it's expressive and it has bloatloads of community support. Most "standard" javascript APIs (especially the W3C DOM) are absolutely dreadful to work with, especially if you like modern javascript (a smalltalk-ish blend of "functional" and object-oriented javascript). If IE falls under 5% of market share (not like it'll ever happen), jQuery will simply remove the now-irrelevant pieces of code. My proof for this is simple: http://zeptojs.com/ http://zeptojs.com/ This is a 5k library aiming to implement the full jQuery API while restricting its compatibility to mobile webkit browsers. As long as there is more than a single browser (and each Webkit port out there counts as a supplementary browser), jQuery will thrive.