Javascript Libraries

Discussion in 'Javascript' started by Matt Silberstein, Jan 9, 2006.

  1. Matt Silberstein, Jan 9, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Matt Silberstein

    Randy Webb Guest

    Randy Webb, Jan 9, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Matt Silberstein

    Matt Kruse Guest

    Matt Kruse, Jan 9, 2006
    #3
  4. On Mon, 9 Jan 2006 03:06:07 -0600, in comp.lang.javascript , "Matt
    Kruse" <> in <>
    wrote:

    >Matt Silberstein wrote:
    >> Are there any good qualities libraries out there, free or for
    >> "reasonable" cost?

    >
    >To do what?


    Yeah, I know, I should have said a bit more. I have in mind a consumer
    oriented service site, so I have lots of general needs. I would much
    rather use a well developed library than write my own so I can
    concentrate on the, I hope, original stuff. So I am looking for a
    variety of things. I have a vague need, vague responses are probably
    good enough.

    --
    Matt Silberstein

    Do something today about the Darfur Genocide

    http://www.beawitness.org
    http://www.darfurgenocide.org
    http://www.savedarfur.org

    "Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
    Matt Silberstein, Jan 9, 2006
    #4
  5. Matt Silberstein, Jan 9, 2006
    #5
  6. Matt Silberstein

    Matt Kruse Guest

    Matt Kruse, Jan 9, 2006
    #6
  7. Matt Silberstein wrote:

    > [...] "Matt Kruse" [...] wrote:
    >>Matt Silberstein wrote:
    >>> Are there any good qualities libraries out there, free or for
    >>> "reasonable" cost?

    >> To do what?

    >
    > Yeah, I know, I should have said a bit more. I have in mind a consumer
    > oriented service site, [...]


    First of all, a consumer-oriented service site does not _depend_ on
    client-side JS/ECMAScript support.


    PointedEars
    Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn, Jan 9, 2006
    #7
  8. Matt Silberstein

    Randy Webb Guest

    Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn said the following on 1/9/2006 4:12 PM:
    > Matt Silberstein wrote:
    >
    >
    >>[...] "Matt Kruse" [...] wrote:
    >>
    >>>Matt Silberstein wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>Are there any good qualities libraries out there, free or for
    >>>>"reasonable" cost?
    >>>
    >>>To do what?

    >>
    >>Yeah, I know, I should have said a bit more. I have in mind a consumer
    >>oriented service site, [...]

    >
    >
    > First of all, a consumer-oriented service site does not _depend_ on
    > client-side JS/ECMAScript support.
    >


    Question: What does that have to do with anything in this thread?
    Answer: Nothing.
    Question: Why does TL post such unrelated gibberish?
    Answer: He knows no better yet?

    --
    Randy
    comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq & newsgroup weekly
    Javascript Best Practices - http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/
    Randy Webb, Jan 9, 2006
    #8
  9. Matt Silberstein

    Matt Kruse Guest

    Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
    > First of all, a consumer-oriented service site does not _depend_ on
    > client-side JS/ECMAScript support.


    Oops, you forgot to write "in my opinion".

    A web site depends on whatever the hell it wants to, whether you agree with
    it or not.

    --
    Matt Kruse
    http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com
    http://www.AjaxToolbox.com
    Matt Kruse, Jan 9, 2006
    #9
  10. Matt Kruse wrote:

    > Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
    >> First of all, a consumer-oriented service site does not _depend_ on
    >> client-side JS/ECMAScript support.

    >
    > Oops, you forgot to write "in my opinion".


    No, I did not. Forcing consumers to have client-side JS/ECMAScript support
    to use the service is _not_ consumer-oriented, from a very objective point
    of view.


    PointedEars
    Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn, Jan 9, 2006
    #10
  11. Matt Silberstein

    VK Guest

    Matt Silberstein wrote:
    > Yeah, I know, I should have said a bit more. I have in mind a consumer
    > oriented service site, so I have lots of general needs. I would much
    > rather use a well developed library than write my own so I can
    > concentrate on the, I hope, original stuff. So I am looking for a
    > variety of things. I have a vague need, vague responses are probably
    > good enough.


    Then another must in your collection should be "prototype.js" library
    <http://prototype.conio.net/>

    >From my personal experience a lot of home-developers are using it. It

    is based on how many times my shortcut function $(id) for
    document.getElementById had clinched in someone's environment (because
    prototype.js has it's own of the same kind).
    Actually the absence of package namespaces is a killer in JavaScript.
    That would be a project for the good of humanity :) to collect all
    most popular libraries and get the list of used function/glob variable
    names from them. Spice it up with the list of "top 20 tasty names" like
    IE, FF, NN etc. which should be presumed by anyone's library to be
    occupied in the global scope. Add window own properties atop of it
    (like "self"). All together it would be a must-have table for any
    JavaScript programmer, I think.
    VK, Jan 9, 2006
    #11
  12. Matt Silberstein

    Matt Kruse Guest

    Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
    > No, I did not. Forcing consumers to have client-side JS/ECMAScript
    > support to use the service is _not_ consumer-oriented, from a very
    > objective point of view.


    Sure it is. Just not to your standards, which you are generalizing to be the
    standards that everyone should follow. How nice of you.

    There is always a "minimum requirement" to use any type of software. If you
    buy software off the shelf today, surely you wouldn't expect to use it on
    your old 486 running Windows 3.1. If that was your computer, you would have
    limited options. But the software maker surely would not be criticized for
    making software that is not "consumer oriented".

    If a site decides to require javascript (or flash, or SSL, or CSS, or a
    browser newer than Mosaic 1.0, etc) then they have purposely limited their
    potential audience. This is not a bad thing. It just has consequences. If
    the site builders are okay with the consequences, then that's their
    perogative. I'm a consumer, and I don't mind sites that require javascript
    at all. Clearly your generalization is just your opinion.

    --
    Matt Kruse
    http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com
    http://www.AjaxToolbox.com
    Matt Kruse, Jan 9, 2006
    #12
  13. VK wrote:

    > Matt Silberstein wrote:
    >> Yeah, I know, I should have said a bit more. I have in mind a consumer
    >> oriented service site, so I have lots of general needs. I would much
    >> rather use a well developed library than write my own so I can
    >> concentrate on the, I hope, original stuff. So I am looking for a
    >> variety of things. I have a vague need, vague responses are probably
    >> good enough.

    >
    > Then another must in your collection should be "prototype.js" library
    > <http://prototype.conio.net/>


    No, it should not. But I am not surprised that you recommend it.

    >>From my personal experience a lot of home-developers are using it.

    > [...]


    People without minimum clue, no doubt.

    Will you learn how to quote?


    PointedEars
    Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn, Jan 9, 2006
    #13
  14. Matt Silberstein

    Jonas Raoni Guest

    Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn escreveu:
    > VK wrote:
    > > Matt Silberstein wrote:
    > >> I would much rather use a well developed library than write my own so I can
    > >> concentrate on the, I hope, original stuff.[...]

    > > Then another must in your collection should be "prototype.js" library
    > > <http://prototype.conio.net/>

    >
    > No, it should not. But I am not surprised that you recommend it.


    I took a look on this code one month ago and I didn't liked too, the
    guy prototyped even the Object, which killed the "for..in" loop.

    In my opinion most of those functions just complicates what was so
    supposed to be very easy... Some of them are handy, but since he's
    writing a library that's used by a lot of people, he should write
    better things and for sure avoid global objects, anyway, it's not my
    problem ;]

    > It is based on how many times my shortcut function $(id) for
    > document.getElementById had clinched in someone's environment (because
    > prototype.js has it's own of the same kind).


    I also had problems with this Prototype library, but it was due to the
    "for..in" death, I sent an email to the creator and he said that was
    going to correct.

    > Actually the absence of package namespaces is a killer in JavaScript.


    But you can create your namespaces, it won't avoid such problems, but
    if you choose a nice name the chances of breaking your code will really
    decrease, and if it get overwritten by another developer, at least it
    will be easier for you to find the problem as nothing will work :)

    JonasStuffs = {
    a: function(){},
    b: 123
    };

    You can even make something in a java style haha:

    com = {jonasraoni: {etc: {
    a: function(){},
    b: 123
    }}};

    Sure it doesn't need to look so ugly...


    --
    Jonas Raoni Soares Silva
    http://www.jsfromhell.com
    Jonas Raoni, Jan 10, 2006
    #14
  15. Matt Silberstein

    Jim Ley Guest

    On 9 Jan 2006 14:57:19 -0800, "VK" <> wrote:

    >Actually the absence of package namespaces is a killer in JavaScript.
    >That would be a project for the good of humanity :) to collect all
    >most popular libraries and get the list of used function/glob variable
    >names from them.


    Surely any competent library that you wanted to integrate would only
    use one global name?

    Jim.
    Jim Ley, Jan 10, 2006
    #15
  16. Matt Silberstein

    VK Guest

    Jim Ley wrote:
    > Surely any competent library that you wanted to integrate would only
    > use one global name?


    You can count on it! :)
    VK, Jan 10, 2006
    #16
  17. Matt Silberstein

    Randy Webb Guest

    VK said the following on 1/10/2006 12:16 PM:
    > Jim Ley wrote:
    >
    >>Surely any competent library that you wanted to integrate would only
    >>use one global name?

    >
    >
    > You can count on it! :)
    >


    Then why would you need a "list of global variables"?

    --
    Randy
    comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq & newsgroup weekly
    Javascript Best Practices - http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/
    Randy Webb, Jan 10, 2006
    #17
  18. Matt Silberstein

    VK Guest

    Randy Webb wrote:
    > VK said the following on 1/10/2006 12:16 PM:
    > > Jim Ley wrote:
    > >
    > >>Surely any competent library that you wanted to integrate would only
    > >>use one global name?

    > >
    > >
    > > You can count on it! :)
    > >

    >
    > Then why would you need a "list of global variables"?


    Because you cannot count on everyone else.
    I thought the OP's idea was to "urbi et orbi", not just sharing
    experience between a group of "selected people" (I'm aside). There are
    rather popular libraries which overload or extend host object methods
    (window or document) and which have some global variables like
    "isSomething". It is terrible, incorrect, errorneous, false, profanic,
    obscene, sacrilegious, amateurish, dilettantish, jackleg, jackass and
    mf b.s.

    The problem remains that a lot of people are not aware of it or do not
    give a tea-spoon of the substance for this matter ;-)

    So rather then pretend that the problem do not exists it is better to
    get a fair picture of what obstacles can be met by academically correct
    libraries in the imperfect surrounding.

    IMHighlyHO
    VK, Jan 10, 2006
    #18
  19. On Mon, 09 Jan 2006 22:12:12 +0100, in comp.lang.javascript , Thomas
    'PointedEars' Lahn <> in
    <> wrote:

    >Matt Silberstein wrote:
    >
    >> [...] "Matt Kruse" [...] wrote:
    >>>Matt Silberstein wrote:
    >>>> Are there any good qualities libraries out there, free or for
    >>>> "reasonable" cost?
    >>> To do what?

    >>
    >> Yeah, I know, I should have said a bit more. I have in mind a consumer
    >> oriented service site, [...]

    >
    >First of all, a consumer-oriented service site does not _depend_ on
    >client-side JS/ECMAScript support.


    You are, of course, welcome to your own private definitions. I am, of
    course, free to make an attempt to produce a product. The product I
    have in mind would provide consumer value and requires JavaScript (or
    functional equivalent) for implementation. I don't want to package it
    as a stand alone application, that would not make sense for the stuff.
    So I am willing to exclude some X % that has JavaScript turned off. I
    would, of course, make that as clear as is reasonable.


    --
    Matt Silberstein

    Do something today about the Darfur Genocide

    http://www.beawitness.org
    http://www.darfurgenocide.org
    http://www.savedarfur.org

    "Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
    Matt Silberstein, Jan 10, 2006
    #19
  20. Matt Silberstein

    VK Guest

    Matt Silberstein wrote:
    > So I am willing to exclude some X % that has JavaScript turned off. I
    > would, of course, make that as clear as is reasonable.


    May be consider as highly trolling, but these "users with JavaScript
    turned off" for me still remain kind of Bigfoot or Flying Soucer.
    Anyone knows about them, many believes in them, knows stories about
    them, someone even personally met... another person who sees them by
    own eyes. I'm just kinda staying out of luck I guess. Between me and my
    colleges we have over 30 traps set all around the area (web-servers
    with visitors stats) and no one damn bell buzzed for many years. Maybe
    we should try in Oregon?
    VK, Jan 10, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Karsten Wutzke
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    907
    Roedy Green
    Jun 29, 2007
  2. Sriram Srinivasan
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    550
    Benjamin Kaplan
    Nov 12, 2009
  3. Philippe C. Martin
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    166
    kaeli
    Apr 18, 2005
  4. Luke Matuszewski

    AJAX frameworks/libraries written in JavaScript...

    Luke Matuszewski, Nov 24, 2005, in forum: Javascript
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    88
    khakman
    Nov 29, 2005
  5. Neo Geshel

    Javascript Libraries... which one?

    Neo Geshel, Feb 16, 2007, in forum: Javascript
    Replies:
    20
    Views:
    282
    Richard Cornford
    Feb 18, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page