3 ms·
I like that there's innovation in the space, but there's a couple things about this library that bother me: - Namespacing is horrible. I've found several globa
by qeorge 17y ago
I like that there's innovation in the space, but there's a couple things about this library that bother me:
- Namespacing is horrible. I've found several global objects it declares, like Browser. Not cool.
- As others have noted, it has no notes on what browsers it supports. IIRC, the thing slowing down sizzle the most is having to support older browsers. There's certainly cases where the browser is predictable, but for everyday use I'll stick with jQ.
[Edit: Supports / targeted for IE8, FF3.5, Opera 10, and Chrome out of the box. I went straight to rightjs.org, and missed the note. Thanks Igor!]
- Extends the prototypes of basic objects, like String, Array, even Object.
- IgorPartola 17y agoI agree with you completely. I looked through the API and jQuery is much cleaner in that sense. However, I think it's great that someone is squeezing extra performance out of JS. Also, from the linked article: "First, all the old browser patches and hacks were moved in a separated dynamically loadable module. The core by itself now focuses on the modern browsers support, meaningly FF >=3.5, IE >=8 Opera >10=, Safari 3,4, Google Chrome, while the old browsers support module handles IE6,7, Konqueror and old versions of Opera and FF."
- qeorge 17y agoThanks Igor, I went directly to rightjs.org and was unable to find this info. Should have looked on the blog.
- IgorPartola 17y agoNo problem.