Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Spine -- A lightweight framework for building JavaScript web applications

maccman.github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 50 posts

Re: Spine -- A lightweight framework for building JavaScript web applications

#11

Post by jashkenas »

netghost wrote: post #8

Seems neat, but it would have been nice to differentiate itself from backbone a little more upfront. The sites even look similar. The key architectural difference seems to be that the ui is updated before the server responds, which is great in a single user situation, but can get pretty inconsistant once you're in a multi user app. I do have to say that I like the patterns section at the end, it's always good to see…

That's actually not an architectural difference. In Backbone, when you call .save(), the attributes update instantly, and the changes are synced to the server asynchronously.

Re: Spine -- A lightweight framework for building JavaScript web applications

#12

Post by beseku »

I'll be honest, it's an MVC JS framework centred around jQuery or Zepto. If I'm familiar with Backbone, what is going to drag me over to this - the size/number of lines of code isn't, thats for sure.

Javascript frameworks are making all of the mistakes that PHP frameworks did, no differentiation and promoting fragmentation. Backbone is up on Github so would it not have been more constructive to fork it and create one great product, not two less great products?

Re: Spine -- A lightweight framework for building JavaScript web applications

#13

Post by collypops »

beseku wrote: post #12

I'll be honest, it's an MVC JS framework centred around jQuery or Zepto. If I'm familiar with Backbone, what is going to drag me over to this - the size/number of lines of code isn't, thats for sure. Javascript frameworks are making all of the mistakes that PHP frameworks did, no differentiation and promoting fragmentation. Backbone is up on Github so would it not have been more constructive to fork it and create one…

Backbone doesn't become any less great because a similar project has appeared. If we are to believe the claims of the creator, Spine is fundamentally different from Backbone, so I dont think a fork would have sufficed.

Re: Spine -- A lightweight framework for building JavaScript web applications

#14

Post by jashkenas »

beseku wrote: post #12

I'll be honest, it's an MVC JS framework centred around jQuery or Zepto. If I'm familiar with Backbone, what is going to drag me over to this - the size/number of lines of code isn't, thats for sure. Javascript frameworks are making all of the mistakes that PHP frameworks did, no differentiation and promoting fragmentation. Backbone is up on Github so would it not have been more constructive to fork it and create one…

As in the general economy ... competition between similar open-source projects is good for developers. Spine provides an alternative way of accomplishing the same goals as Backbone, written in a different style. I'm sure there's lots that both projects can learn/steal/share with one another.

Open source isn't a zero-sum game, the more you share, the more you have to give away.

Re: Spine -- A lightweight framework for building JavaScript web applications

#15

Post by jedschmidt »

jashkenas wrote: post #9
bchhun wrote: post #4

wasn't this backbone.js ? the TODO example is the same one !!

This isn't Backbone.js -- it's an alternative. Different codebase, different function names, partially overlapping API. At the top of the FAQ, he answers some of the comparison questions: http://maccman.github.com/spine/#h-faq The bit about it being smaller is pretty misleading (especially when comparing 2k to 3k) -- it may be 500 lines instead of 1100, but the 1100 are heavily commented, and the 500 are entirely com…

The size difference may be more meaningful once the hard dependency of Underscore.js is taken into account.

That said, competing so closely with an Ashkenas library is not a niche I'd want to be in...

Re: Spine -- A lightweight framework for building JavaScript web applications

#16

Post by collypops »

jashkenas wrote: post #14
beseku wrote: post #12

I'll be honest, it's an MVC JS framework centred around jQuery or Zepto. If I'm familiar with Backbone, what is going to drag me over to this - the size/number of lines of code isn't, thats for sure. Javascript frameworks are making all of the mistakes that PHP frameworks did, no differentiation and promoting fragmentation. Backbone is up on Github so would it not have been more constructive to fork it and create one…

As in the general economy ... competition between similar open-source projects is good for developers. Spine provides an alternative way of accomplishing the same goals as Backbone, written in a different style. I'm sure there's lots that both projects can learn/steal/share with one another. Open source isn't a zero-sum game, the more you share, the more you have to give away.

That's what we all sign up for. Some share more than most, which I'm sure many have/will thank you for!

Re: Spine -- A lightweight framework for building JavaScript web applications

#18

Post by flippyhead »

jashkenas wrote: post #9
bchhun wrote: post #4

wasn't this backbone.js ? the TODO example is the same one !!

This isn't Backbone.js -- it's an alternative. Different codebase, different function names, partially overlapping API. At the top of the FAQ, he answers some of the comparison questions: http://maccman.github.com/spine/#h-faq The bit about it being smaller is pretty misleading (especially when comparing 2k to 3k) -- it may be 500 lines instead of 1100, but the 1100 are heavily commented, and the 500 are entirely com…

I'm curious how you respond to the differences in the Spine inheritance model and the argument they make for it:

"Spine's class implementation is one of its features that makes it stand out from the crowd. Rather than copying properties to emulate inheritance, as most libraries, Spine uses JavaScript's native prototypal inheritance. This is how inheritance should be done, and means it's dynamic, properties are resolved at runtime."

Re: Spine -- A lightweight framework for building JavaScript web applications

#19

Post by flippyhead »

netghost wrote: post #8

Seems neat, but it would have been nice to differentiate itself from backbone a little more upfront. The sites even look similar. The key architectural difference seems to be that the ui is updated before the server responds, which is great in a single user situation, but can get pretty inconsistant once you're in a multi user app. I do have to say that I like the patterns section at the end, it's always good to see…

Yeah, my very initial reaction was that this must be a joke of some kind -- I see that it's not -- but boy it seems so similar on the surface
Post reply on HN