4 ms·
One argument against doing both is that Prototype alters many built in classes directly. This is often risky and dangerous, and makes interactions between the t
by litewulf 18y ago
One argument against doing both is that Prototype alters many built in classes directly. This is often risky and dangerous, and makes interactions between the two code bases possible.
- jpcx01 18y agoPrototype alters stuff but jQuery doesn't. So there is very little conflict. The use of Prototype however will prevent use of other altering js frameworks like MooTools. Fundamentally I think Prototype/MooTools are horribly designed javascript library because they introduce incompatibilities. However I use them when I need a free component or 2. I would never drop jQuery though so I always use $j instead of $, even when using jquery by itself
- deleted 18y ago[deleted]
- old-gregg 18y agoA correction: it's better to say "Prototype expands built-in classes", i.e. it adds methods that otherwise aren't there. This is never risky nor dangerous unless you have another global-namespace library, which jQuery isn't.