Ditch React. Ditch Angular. Go Vanilla with Zam

#1

Post by zamjs » Tue, Dec 26, 2017, 4:06 PM UTC

Ditch React. Ditch Angular. Go Vanilla with Zam
zamjs.com

Re: Ditch React. Ditch Angular. Go Vanilla with Zam

#2

Post by pspeter3 » Tue, Dec 26, 2017, 6:10 PM UTC

Why are the methods you provide better than the existing document methods? Also why is the AJAX method better than fetch?

Re: Ditch React. Ditch Angular. Go Vanilla with Zam

#3

Post by jarsin » Tue, Dec 26, 2017, 6:13 PM UTC

So this is vanilla jquery? :)

Re: Ditch React. Ditch Angular. Go Vanilla with Zam

#4

Post by zamjs » Tue, Dec 26, 2017, 6:14 PM UTC

pspeter3 wrote: post #2

Why are the methods you provide better than the existing document methods? Also why is the AJAX method better than fetch?

Zam's methods are overall document methods. For example: .each() and .addStyle()

Things get a little more complex with some of the methods though. For example: .css()

Fetch is only faster on certain browsers. I'm thinking about incorporating it in the future.

Re: Ditch React. Ditch Angular. Go Vanilla with Zam

#5

Post by bigdubs » Tue, Dec 26, 2017, 6:14 PM UTC

jarsin wrote: post #3

So this is vanilla jquery? :)

Eventually everything in javascript will be reinvented by hipster hackers.

Re: Ditch React. Ditch Angular. Go Vanilla with Zam

#6

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Dec 26, 2017, 6:14 PM UTC

jarsin wrote: post #3

So this is vanilla jquery? :)

[deleted]

Re: Ditch React. Ditch Angular. Go Vanilla with Zam

#7

Post by koube » Tue, Dec 26, 2017, 6:16 PM UTC

It seems like your examples page is broken on firefox quantum 57.0.1 (64-bit) for MacOS. It shows up halfway off the screen to the left side for me.

https://i.imgur.com/v3IHIoV.png

Re: Ditch React. Ditch Angular. Go Vanilla with Zam

#8

Post by mark242 » Tue, Dec 26, 2017, 6:16 PM UTC

Genuine question: in 2017, why would you create a JS framework that didn't use futures?

eg in the documentation, ".fadeIn(selector, time)" - "Returns nothing". Why not return a future that resolves when the fade completes?

Re: Ditch React. Ditch Angular. Go Vanilla with Zam

#9

Post by zamjs » Tue, Dec 26, 2017, 6:22 PM UTC

mark242 wrote: post #8

Genuine question: in 2017, why would you create a JS framework that didn't use futures? eg in the documentation, ".fadeIn(selector, time)" - "Returns nothing". Why not return a future that resolves when the fade completes?

From a performance stand point -- does it really matter?

You are right. fadeIn and fadeOut should have some optional callback for completion.

Re: Ditch React. Ditch Angular. Go Vanilla with Zam

#10

Post by zamjs » Tue, Dec 26, 2017, 6:25 PM UTC

koube wrote: post #7

It seems like your examples page is broken on firefox quantum 57.0.1 (64-bit) for MacOS. It shows up halfway off the screen to the left side for me. https://i.imgur.com/v3IHIoV.png

Thanks for the catch!! Fixed it.

I had to explicitly set "left: 0"