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

jQuery 3.6.0

blog.jquery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 292 posts

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#221

Post by regus »

shortlived wrote: post #210
yawaworht1978 wrote: post #7

JQuery and reading Resig's book and viewing the source code are responsible for lifting me from horrible dev to below average dev:-) I learned to extend the library and understood to create some minimal libraries for myself. It can be very useful to this day and is almost a ballerina when comparing the bloat of other frameworks or library stacks. You never know maybe the come up with something better than react.

> reading Resig's book I hope you mean the JS ninja one because I just bought it week. Do you remember a particularly impactful section?

I consider secrets of the javascript ninja to be one of if not the best books on javascript. The section on functions and closures are a must read.

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#222

Post by SilverRed »

ivosaur wrote: post #105
tambourine_man wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Do people still use jQuery? Oh yes. Everyday. Still love it. >…Javascript document api via document.querySelector, and document.querySelectorAll The jQuery API is still (and probably aways will be) far superior to the native DOM (terser, composable, more expressive, etc). >…smaller footprint libraries like lodash jQuery is ≈30k gziped and most likely already cached from CDN. >…has fallen out of favor of more compreh…

> jQuery is ≈30k gziped and most likely already cached from CDN. This part isn't so true in reality anymore, due to revised browser caching systems[1]. Doesn't mean you shouldn't use jQuery, just that part of the benefits of a centralized CDN are no longer a factor and it's a lot more sensible to self-host. 1: https://www.stefanjudis.com/notes/say-goodbye-to-resource-ca...

The reality was you where almost never getting a cached version anyway. There are so many versions of jQuery in use over so many CDNs that the chance of a user already having the exact version and cdn that you use is almost nothing.

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#223

Post by ulisesrmzroche »

It’s definitely on the way to becoming legacy tech, but jQuery was a great library back in the day, like, history book great.

It played a big part in the Web 2.0 days, could be argued that if it wasn’t for jQuery we wouldn’t have the modern web at all, or if so, it would be a lot worse.

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#224

Post by SilverRed »

kaba0 wrote: post #202
selfmodruntime wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At Work, we‘re building web applications that need to be accessed by hundreds of editors with thousands of pages. Most of them share an essential bundle of components. Are you telling me a project that complicated can be built using just jquery? Also, what‘s bad about typescript?

Do you need SPA for everything there? Because if server side rendering/logic is “allowed” with only a few interactive bits here and there written in jquery, than it can be absolutely done as that was/is the case a “few” years back.

I work on an app that is half react and half rails templates. Every time something has to change on one of the rails templates it becomes a process of explaining to the project manager that we can't easily make this change which would have been trivial elsewhere because this specific page is using server side rendering.

Its become such a large obstetrical that we have scheduled in a task this year to remove all server side rendering from the app.

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#225

Post by SilverRed »

kaba0 wrote: post #202
selfmodruntime wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At Work, we‘re building web applications that need to be accessed by hundreds of editors with thousands of pages. Most of them share an essential bundle of components. Are you telling me a project that complicated can be built using just jquery? Also, what‘s bad about typescript?

Do you need SPA for everything there? Because if server side rendering/logic is “allowed” with only a few interactive bits here and there written in jquery, than it can be absolutely done as that was/is the case a “few” years back.

I work on an app that is half react and half rails templates. Every time something has to change on one of the rails templates it becomes a process of explaining to the project manager that we can't easily make this change which would have been trivial elsewhere because this specific page is using server side rendering.

Its become such a large problem that we have scheduled in a task this year to remove all server side rendering from the app.

Server side rendering almost always means implementing the same feature twice, once on the server so it loads correct, and then a second time on the frontend so it changes as the user modifies it.

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#226

Post by SilverRed »

synergy20 wrote: post #143

Frontend has been a pain in the ass for me for quite a while as someone trying to learn frontend development. jQuery's concise syntax beats everyone, I hope Javascript can adapt it someday, truly a KISS design gem. However I do need write code to do data-binding myself, which is important for interactivity. Vuejs can be used to replace jQuery however it does not have the simple syntax, you do get data-binding for fre…

I remember the first time I used VueJS after being a long time JQuery developer. It was incredible how much power VueJS and similar frameworks put in your hand using such simple concepts. Not having to add event listeners to everything and manually re triggering things is revolutionary.

I was building dynamic UIs with ease that would have been massive and bug prone jobs in jquery.

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#227

Post by padseeker »

alexk307 wrote: post #49

I still believe that jQuery is the best tool for the job if you're creating a small web application and don't want to learn an entire new framework.

YES this 1000X - I love React and choose to use it regularly and willingly. I am forced to use Angular quite a bit for my day job. While both of these libraries have their place not everything needs to be a single page app. Using server side rendered pages and sprinkling a little JS to add some DOM scripting and dynamic UX should not require adding React or Angular. It many cases using jQuery is good enough.

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#228

Post by iamcreasy »

neilpanchal wrote: post #86

jQuery has the kindest, most warm hearted, whimsical release notes. During the pandemic last year: > We hope you’re staying healthy and safe while so many of us are stuck at home. With a virus ravaging the planet, we realize that jQuery may not be a high priority for you or the sites you manage. When you do have a moment, we recommend that you review this new version and upgrade. Some fun: > I’ve never gotten to say…

Speaking of nice developers, Reaper DAW developers are giving away temp license and in return only asks the user to wear mask. Warmed my heart to see it.

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#229

Post by jontro »

synergy20 wrote: post #220
shortlived wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> one reason I worry about jQuery is that it's losing some steam and the development is not very active It’s super mature which I like. Compare to Vue 3 which is now GA yet lots of related components like Vuetify are quarters behind in supporting v3. Lots of exciting features for sure but also lots of churn.

on jQuery 4.0 roadmap page: https://github.com/jquery/jquery/milestone/7 , it seems having no progress in two full years.

Looks pretty active to me https://github.com/jquery/jquery/milestone/7?closed=1

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#230

Post by temporallobe »

A lot of people throw shade on jQuery, but it’s extremely powerful and versatile. I’ve built entire apps with just jQuery, Foundation, and POJO classes (and other smaller libraries as needed sprinkled in). This stack is certainly not appropriate for all apps, but for small projects it’s far easier to manage than the overkill that is React or Angular. Sure, you don’t get generators and built-in spec testing or other Enterprise-friendly goodies, but for simple apps that use a REST API, jQuery sure as hell provides a nice set of tools. And while modern browsers support the query selector methods that sort mimic jQuery, this starts to get awfully tedious if you want to do complex DOM manipulation and you’ll find yourself writing functions that start to look a lot like jQuery. Why reinvent the wheel in order to save a few kb of space and pride yourself on having a “100% jQuery-free app!” when modern apps already load much larger libraries or minify and package the entire app’s code?
Post reply on HN