4 ms·
Any reasons why they picked MooTools instead of JQuery? MooTools is a Prototype derivative. Prototype derivatives are huge pains, as they litter the global name
by vicaya 17y ago
Any reasons why they picked MooTools instead of JQuery? MooTools is a Prototype derivative. Prototype derivatives are huge pains, as they litter the global namespace like they own it, which makes sane mashup implementations practically impossible.
I hate Prototype and its ilks with a passion.
- jhammerb 17y agohttp://jqueryvsmootools.com http://jqueryvsmootools.com
- vicaya 17y agoWell, the facts mentioned in the post just confirms my judgment why MooTools/Prototype are bad: monkey-patching existing objects and polluting global namespace like no tomorrow, all in the name of object-orientation in a perfectly capable language that's prototype based and functional.
- ilyak 17y agoSorry, but we do want to use actual useful objects (including built-in types) no matter what you'd say. It's viable, it's useful, it's done, it works.
- anutron 17y agoIf you can't be bothered to author your code using only ONE JavaScript library, then yes, name space "pollution" is not very friendly. But if you write all your code using one framework, then the name space is yours to use, which to me is not pollution. It's only a pain when you want to use several frameworks, and the only reason I can imagine to to do that is to use plugins from more than one. That's laziness if you ask me; rather than ask your users to download two libraries, you should author your own version for your framework of choice.