Rails - Sep 2008 - Microsoft beats us to official JQuery support, Do we care?

Is it of any concern that more and more take up the JQuery banner? Why
didn''t they pick Prototype and Scriptaculous? Seems like we jumped on
the REST bandwagon pretty quick but we hold to P&S in face of its ever
growing popularity and adoption. Is Rails leadership tied to P&S on a
more emotional level then they were with SOAP? Heck I don''t know,
I''m
no expert, its just that it seems there has been a call for JQuery on
Rails as the official library  and yet in spite of this and in
deference to what we are seeing at large the response from the Rails
leaders seems to be something akin to "We don''t care whats going
on,
we are P&S no matter what". Not to say P&S is bad, not at all, but
then SOAP wasn''t bad either and we made the change.

What do you think?
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

ChessMess wrote:
> Is it of any concern that more and more take up the JQuery banner? Why
> didn''t they pick Prototype and Scriptaculous? Seems like we jumped
on
> the REST bandwagon pretty quick but we hold to P&S in face of its ever
> growing popularity and adoption. Is Rails leadership tied to P&S on a
> more emotional level then they were with SOAP? Heck I don''t know,
I''m
> no expert, its just that it seems there has been a call for JQuery on
> Rails as the official library  and yet in spite of this and in
> deference to what we are seeing at large the response from the Rails
> leaders seems to be something akin to "We don''t care whats
going on,
> we are P&S no matter what". Not to say P&S is bad, not at all,
but
> then SOAP wasn''t bad either and we made the change.
>
> What do you think?
jQuery is my preferred framework and the one I use in Rails (via the
jRails plugin). But IMHO, the semantics of Prototype better fit that
of jQuery''s and that''s why it is the default javascript
library
shipped with Rails. That shouldn''t stop you though from using the
javascript framework of your choice.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

On 29 Sep 2008, at 05:00, ChessMess wrote:
> Is it of any concern that more and more take up the JQuery banner? Why
> didn''t they pick Prototype and Scriptaculous? Seems like we jumped
on
> the REST bandwagon pretty quick but we hold to P&S in face of its ever
> growing popularity and adoption. Is Rails leadership tied to P&S on a
> more emotional level then they were with SOAP? Heck I don''t know,
I''m
> no expert, its just that it seems there has been a call for JQuery on
> Rails as the official library  and yet in spite of this and in
> deference to what we are seeing at large the response from the Rails
> leaders seems to be something akin to "We don''t care whats
going on,
> we are P&S no matter what". Not to say P&S is bad, not at all,
but
> then SOAP wasn''t bad either and we made the change.
>
> What do you think?
Back in the days where Rails incorporated the javascript helpers,  
jQuery was nowhere near P&S. Also, Prototype has a Ruby-esque syntax,  
in the RUBY on rails context I find this a very valid choice. If  
you''re only using the Javascript helpers within Rails, it
shouldn''t
matter to you whether it uses Prototype, JQuery, YUI, Dojo, … The  
Rails code will be exactly the same. If you''re used to writing your  
Javascript code yourself, there''s nothing holding you back from using  
another library in your Rails app, just don''t count on the Javascript  
helpers anymore (or use the jrails plugin if you really have to).


Best regards

Peter De Berdt


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

On Sep 29, 8:42 am, Peter De Berdt
<peter.de.be...-LPO8gxj9N8aZIoH1IeqzKA@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
> On 29 Sep 2008, at 05:00, ChessMess wrote:
> Back in the days where Rails incorporated the javascript helpers,  
> jQuery was nowhere near P&S. Also, Prototype has a Ruby-esque syntax,  
> in the RUBY on rails context I find this a very valid choice. If  
> you''re only using the Javascript helpers within Rails, it
shouldn''t  
> matter to you whether it uses Prototype, JQuery, YUI, Dojo, … The  
> Rails code will be exactly the same. If you''re used to writing
your  
> Javascript code yourself, there''s nothing holding you back from
using  
> another library in your Rails app, just don''t count on the
Javascript  
> helpers anymore (or use the jrails plugin if you really have to).
>
All true. In my opinion if you''ve just using the helpers to generate
code, it doesn''t make the blindest bit of difference whether that
helper is generating JS that uses prototype or scriptaculous. And if
you''re writing the code yourself (which you should to get the most out
of the either of them - rjs is a crutch) then which one Rails ships
with doesn''t make the blindest bit of difference.

Fred
> Best regards
>
> Peter De Berdt
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Well given that the majority of the web development world is throwing
its weight behind JQuery, I will be picking up a JQ book and will look
to code my future Rails apps using it. Nothing against P&S, but I want
to focus my time on the top libraries and its pretty clear given all
the recent activity and the exponentially growing community behind JQ
that its (for now) top dog.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Awesome, a JQuery drop in replacement for P&S :

http://ennerchi.com/projects/jrails

The migration continues, whether or not 37 Signals wants to
acknowledge it.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

On 09 Oct 2008, at 11:28, ChessMess wrote:
> Awesome, a JQuery drop in replacement for P&S :
>
> http://ennerchi.com/projects/jrails
>
> The migration continues, whether or not 37 Signals wants to
> acknowledge it.
It''s been around for quite a while and it has nothing to do with  
rails, nor will it ever get into rails.

This plugin is a nice piece of work and is ideal for people who like  
to use jquery plugins without actually knowing how to do decent  
javascript programming imho. Jquery has always been about unobtrusive  
javascript and keeping inline javascript out and this plugin does  
exactly the opposite (just like the prototype/scriptaculous helpers do  
btw).

Let me put this straight, I love both Prototype/Scriptaculous and  
JQuery, and I''d use either one depending on the project I''m
working on
and the requirements. I will choose the one that offers me "the path  
of least resistance". But all this "there can only be one" is
just
plain bullocks. Prototype/scriptaculous was an obvious choice to be  
bundled with Rails: it uses a ruby-like syntax.

The only thing these plugins do, is provide you with options. There is  
no migration, there probably never will be one and 37signals couldn''t  
care less, because they see Rails as a means of producing profitable  
web applications, and how right they are.


Best regards

Peter De Berdt


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---