TobyL
Coding Team
Posts: 694
|
 |
« on: Apr 27, 2007, 08:52 AM » |
|
Way of topic,... but I can't resist  Mootools is a fine library and I don't mind using it but there is a (performance) difference, especially when using multiple events. The way mootools caches (or stacks) events can slow things down or create very interesting but unwanted effects I recently discovered this myself trying to develop a graphic intensive interactive grid (24 fields). I coded it in both mootools and in jQuery and the latter behaved much smoother. Besides that I like the namespacing (if there is such a word) you can use in jQuery wich makes it less prone to conflicts with other libraries. Having said all that I'm quite happy with MODx using mootools. The previous post was made in jest, but you understood that already I bet. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
davidm
Marketing & Design Team
Posts: 6,468
The best way to predict the future is to invent it
|
|
« Reply #1 on: Apr 27, 2007, 09:01 AM » |
|
Interresting... yeah I have heard the namespace thingy, thought mootools handled that too (but I am still learning). Nothing prevents MODx users to choose jQuery for the frontend, except they'll have to disable quickedit or suffer conflicts when logged in... Thanks for bringing up the differences, very interresting Jelle If you really think jQuery would really be way better than mootools, why not submit that to the team for future release ? It sure means a bit of work but I have no doubt if the reward is worth it this will make it into future release... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ZAP
Testers
Posts: 1,309
|
|
« Reply #2 on: Apr 27, 2007, 09:08 AM » |
|
For 0.9.6, MODx will be using mootools for sure. A whole lot of work has gone into making that happen, and the results are generally excellent. But some of us would like to keep stirring the pot to see if that might change for 0.9.7 and beyond... There's already a lot of discussion on this throughout the forums, so I won't belabor it here. As for the QuickEdit frontend issue, I think that the folks at jQuery have actually provided a way to resolve that easily, which jester444 discovered and posted here: http://modxcms.com/forums/index.php/topic,2531.msg93221.html#msg93221 |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
rthrash
Foundation
Posts: 8,910
|
|
« Reply #3 on: Apr 27, 2007, 09:08 AM » |
|
All libraries are under consideration, and jQuery definitely has strong support behind it (both as requests here and behind it in its community). If jQuery is your library of choice, both Ajax Search and Quick Edit should be pretty straightforward to port to that library.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
MODx is a framework that allows web professionals to turn over sites to end-users for daily maintenance without worrying. Community participation and questions are encouraged, especially when you help us help you, read the wiki, and review snippet parameters – even if you have to look at the source. Searching the forums helps, too.
Ryan Thrash
MODx Co-Founder
Principal @ Collabpad
work productively.
work intelligently.
work together.
|
|
|
|
charliez
|
|
« Reply #4 on: Apr 27, 2007, 10:32 AM » |
|
And, if I may say so, the communities are completely different...
try making a newbie question in MooTools and you will get pummeled
and you probably will never go there again...
The jQuery community is much more friendly and understanding...
Before you guys start poking at me...
yes, the MODx community is the friendliest I have seen...
seriously... I thing sottwell put it nicely in one thread I read...
something like, "it takes a lot to make somebody angry in
this community"... and I think that is right, this is a comfortable place
to learn, communicate and work!!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
davidm
Marketing & Design Team
Posts: 6,468
The best way to predict the future is to invent it
|
|
« Reply #5 on: Apr 27, 2007, 11:16 AM » |
|
charliez, you got a point here... I haven't decided yet if I'll use mootools or jQuery on the frontend... I've been learning mootools but the while the doc is probably very nice for a proficient js coder, it's hard on beginners... jQuery doc provides context for the code and a step by step approach which makes it easier. Didn't check their forum yet, but that's good to know And thanks for the kind words A community is a learning place, and personnally, I learn a lot from others but also from trying to make as clear to others as possible what I know. Questions are as enlightening as answers and sometimes more ! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
davidm
Marketing & Design Team
Posts: 6,468
The best way to predict the future is to invent it
|
|
« Reply #6 on: Apr 28, 2007, 03:47 AM » |
|
About the team choosing mootools over jQuery : Mootools meets a couple of important goals that fit philosophically with MODx. First it's lightweight and fast. Second it's very extendable. While there are other systems that are a bit faster, not many that I'm aware of can match MODx for flexibility and overall performance. I think the same is very true for Mootools. Ok.. I have no experience from either of those, so I have to take your word for it but from what I understood with a bit of googling is that MooTools is truly much better extensible than jQuery. jQuery's biggest advantage though is that the syntax is very simple. You don't have to write as complex code as you do with other libs. But the result from my googling session is that MooTools really looks the best fit for MODx. The basic idea in both MooTools and MODx is very similar. EDIT: And I dream of the day that MODx has the same kind of download than MooTools has.. And what the little birds are saying, the wait might not be that long..  About namespaces and mootools : There is also now a namespaced version of mootools available if you look hard enough (like 2 minutes on the mootools forums).
I had missed that ! I'll go look for it... This being said, I took a longer look at jQuery and the doc is way easier to grasp no sweat... Edit : To Moderator : Thanks for spitting the thread |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: Apr 28, 2007, 09:33 AM by davidm »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
gareth84
Jr. Member
Posts: 48
|
|
« Reply #7 on: Apr 28, 2007, 04:09 AM » |
|
i find the people over at jquery a lot nicer towards newbies  |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: Apr 28, 2007, 09:10 AM by gareth84 »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
beryl
Member
Posts: 69
|
|
« Reply #8 on: Apr 28, 2007, 01:17 PM » |
|
It´s always easy to get answeres from Jquery users, and even the developers.
Ive been on the mailing list for about 4 months now, and even "stupid" questions are being answered.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
“Animals are something invented by plants to move seeds around. An extremely yang solution to a peculiar problem which they faced.” Terrance Mckenna.
|
|
|
Lucretia
Jr. Member
Posts: 39
|
|
« Reply #9 on: Apr 29, 2007, 07:48 AM » |
|
Now, I thought the licence was commercial, now it seems it's not...that's why I chose mootools originally.
Luke.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
beryl
Member
Posts: 69
|
|
« Reply #10 on: Apr 29, 2007, 10:10 AM » |
|
But you thought the cow was free |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
“Animals are something invented by plants to move seeds around. An extremely yang solution to a peculiar problem which they faced.” Terrance Mckenna.
|
|
|
aour
Moderators
Posts: 835
|
|
« Reply #11 on: Apr 29, 2007, 04:10 PM » |
|
Hi
Actually, I learn js and Jquery website (documention and tutorials) is a very good teacher.
And :
- some tutorials in different languages
- A lot of plugins
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
davidm
Marketing & Design Team
Posts: 6,468
The best way to predict the future is to invent it
|
|
« Reply #12 on: Apr 29, 2007, 04:59 PM » |
|
jQuery has way more plugins than mootools, which would mean the dev community around jQuery has grown more rapidly (might be helped by friendliness too !).
I definitely thinks I'll choose jQuery over mootools, in the end...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
tillda
Testers
Posts: 89
|
|
« Reply #13 on: Apr 29, 2007, 05:50 PM » |
|
Hi.
I've checked both libraries last months and let me say my opinion.
IMHO, jQuery is great for enhancing web sites with JS/Ajax stuff. It's simple, becouse there is only one principle for doing anything - the famous "find things, do stuff". You can create really advanced widgets just by specifiing the data by HTML elements than finding the root elm by id and running the correct plugin. Like $("#mytabs").tabs().
On the other hand, I found Mootools much more developer-oriented. You don't have a bunch of ready-made widgets, but rather five to ten sets of good developer tools. Like the Base library for impelementing classes. Like the $something functions ($pick, $extend...).
So, on front-end jQ is imho the best way, since things can't be any simpler. But if you are building the whole app in JS, I would probably vote for Mootools.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Bravado
Coding Team
Posts: 1,024
"I can learn to resist anything but temptation..."
|
|
« Reply #14 on: Apr 29, 2007, 11:15 PM » |
|
How about a combo of MooTools and EXT? That way you can have the lightweight capabilities of MooTools for the majority of the work and throw EXT in the mix when needed. Might be a win-win combo if it works. Jeff |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Jeff Whitfield
"When someone asks you, A penny for your thoughts, and you put your two cents in, what happens to the other penny?"
-George Carlin
|
|
|
|
