4 ms·

JQuery dependency is a deal-breaker for me. Telling library consumers that you require another, near 10,000 LOC, library is asking a lot. JQuery should be for

JQuery dependency is a deal-breaker for me. Telling library consumers that you require another, near 10,000 LOC, library is asking a lot. JQuery should be for end developers only. Instead write your libraries to HTML standards, and provide links to polyfills that they'll need. Don't assume everyone is targeting IE6.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
- MatthewPhillips 14y ago
  They're not really delivering an 11k library then, are they?
  - kaonashi 14y ago
    They are; they're just assuming you're already using jQuery (which for 95% of people using Backbone, is a correct assumption)
donohoe 14y ago
Agreed - laconic is a tough sell for me but I can get over that. However having JQuery required as well!? Too heavy now for any mobile web apps I'd planned.
andyl 14y ago
jQuery dependency is also a problem for me - I dropped jQuery and use Zepto instead for a mobile app I'm writing.
mkmcdonald 14y ago
[from the link] > Backbone UI depends on Backbone, Underscore, jQuery, and laconic. That's a disaster waiting to happen.
- joestelmach 14y ago
  care to elaborate?
  - mkmcdonald 14y ago
    Requiring four separate APIs is a client-side dependency nightmare; requiring around 15k lines of uncompressed code is a disaster waiting to happen.
    - datapimp 14y ago
      Well, it is a disaster that has been waiting for a while now. Several large production apps on that stack, and not really any problems.
      - fadzlan 14y ago
        I think the point is there may come the times when there two frameworks that depends on different version of dependencies. It could be the Backbone-UI and something else. It would be okay if the consumer code is dependent on all the libraries. But if one of your framework is dependent on certain version of library and another one depends on another version of the said library, that is disaster waiting to happen. It would be hard to upgrade one framework , hence making it hard to move forward since your code is all tangled to all the frameworks.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

MatthewPhillips 14y ago
They're not really delivering an 11k library then, are they?
- kaonashi 14y ago
  They are; they're just assuming you're already using jQuery (which for 95% of people using Backbone, is a correct assumption)

donohoe 14y ago

Agreed - laconic is a tough sell for me but I can get over that. However having JQuery required as well!? Too heavy now for any mobile web apps I'd planned.

andyl 14y ago

jQuery dependency is also a problem for me - I dropped jQuery and use Zepto instead for a mobile app I'm writing.

mkmcdonald 14y ago

[from the link] > Backbone UI depends on Backbone, Underscore, jQuery, and laconic. That's a disaster waiting to happen.

joestelmach 14y ago
care to elaborate?
- mkmcdonald 14y ago
  Requiring four separate APIs is a client-side dependency nightmare; requiring around 15k lines of uncompressed code is a disaster waiting to happen.
  - datapimp 14y ago
    Well, it is a disaster that has been waiting for a while now. Several large production apps on that stack, and not really any problems.
    - fadzlan 14y ago
      I think the point is there may come the times when there two frameworks that depends on different version of dependencies. It could be the Backbone-UI and something else. It would be okay if the consumer code is dependent on all the libraries. But if one of your framework is dependent on certain version of library and another one depends on another version of the said library, that is disaster waiting to happen. It would be hard to upgrade one framework , hence making it hard to move forward since your code is all tangled to all the frameworks.