Dojo Toolkit 1.7 Released.
dojotoolkit.org
Dojo Toolkit 1.7 Released.
1–10 of 34 posts
Re: Dojo Toolkit 1.7 Released.
#2And not a single fuck was given.
Does anyone actually think dojo has a future compared to the power that jquery gives to make your own "widgets" but far simpler than dojo?
The simplest tutorials in the dojo documentation put html tags in the JavaScript code. Generating them like strings. It reminds me of the days when people would generate html (and javascript, oh god) using Java.
Dojo is too big, too complicated and bloated. It should be split up/down in all its major components.
Re: Dojo Toolkit 1.7 Released.
#3And not a single fuck was given. Does anyone actually think dojo has a future compared to the power that jquery gives to make your own "widgets" but far simpler than dojo? The simplest tutorials in the dojo documentation put html tags in the JavaScript code. Generating them like strings. It reminds me of the days when people would generate html (and javascript, oh god) using Java. Dojo is too big, too complicated and…
It's true, the docs aren't exactly good (and there are like, 3 versions of it floating around - which one to reference?).
But it doesn't sound like you've actually used Dojo. It's neither big, complicated or bloated. Things ARE modularized, and the core has a lot of bits that are useful outside a browser environment. If you look at jQuery, the whole thing targets being run in a browser. Dojo base has a lot of language utilities that are helpful - say if you're using it in node.
Re: Dojo Toolkit 1.7 Released.
#4And not a single fuck was given. Does anyone actually think dojo has a future compared to the power that jquery gives to make your own "widgets" but far simpler than dojo? The simplest tutorials in the dojo documentation put html tags in the JavaScript code. Generating them like strings. It reminds me of the days when people would generate html (and javascript, oh god) using Java. Dojo is too big, too complicated and…
It's true, the docs aren't exactly good (and there are like, 3 versions of it floating around - which one to reference?). But it doesn't sound like you've actually used Dojo. It's neither big, complicated or bloated. Things ARE modularized, and the core has a lot of bits that are useful outside a browser environment. If you look at jQuery, the whole thing targets being run in a browser. Dojo base has a lot of languag…
Ive used it against my wish, but it may be also because of inexperience with it which makes me judge so badly. I could have done what I was doing in jQuery far more faster and effecient, and the resulting code would have been easier to maintain for many other developers. Very few know dojo.
Also the idea of "dojoAttachPoint" as an attribute on basically any tag is questionable. If I recall only the latest html spec allows that, but dojo used it even before.
Re: Dojo Toolkit 1.7 Released.
#5Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's true, the docs aren't exactly good (and there are like, 3 versions of it floating around - which one to reference?). But it doesn't sound like you've actually used Dojo. It's neither big, complicated or bloated. Things ARE modularized, and the core has a lot of bits that are useful outside a browser environment. If you look at jQuery, the whole thing targets being run in a browser. Dojo base has a lot of languag…
Ive used it against my wish, but it may be also because of inexperience with it which makes me judge so badly. I could have done what I was doing in jQuery far more faster and effecient, and the resulting code would have been easier to maintain for many other developers. Very few know dojo. Also the idea of "dojoAttachPoint" as an attribute on basically any tag is questionable. If I recall only the latest html spec a…
jQuery often uses "data-blah" as an attribute- that isn't any more or less valid than "dojoAttachPoint".
And the general point is that Dojo can do a lot more than jQuery- for one, it works outside of the browser. A library like MooTools is the same. jQuery is, at it's heart, a DOM manipulation tool. Dojo and the others are more complete libraries that aren't just for HTML.
Re: Dojo Toolkit 1.7 Released.
#6Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ive used it against my wish, but it may be also because of inexperience with it which makes me judge so badly. I could have done what I was doing in jQuery far more faster and effecient, and the resulting code would have been easier to maintain for many other developers. Very few know dojo. Also the idea of "dojoAttachPoint" as an attribute on basically any tag is questionable. If I recall only the latest html spec a…
jQuery often uses "data-blah" as an attribute- that isn't any more or less valid than "dojoAttachPoint". And the general point is that Dojo can do a lot more than jQuery- for one, it works outside of the browser. A library like MooTools is the same. jQuery is, at it's heart, a DOM manipulation tool. Dojo and the others are more complete libraries that aren't just for HTML.
It is not required by jQuery to use "data-blah" in any html tag. Developing a dojo widget requires me to break html validation. I can perfectly fine use jquery without the data-blah attributes.
Yes dojo is a complete library and for 99% of the use cases for a web application, it is overkill.
Re: Dojo Toolkit 1.7 Released.
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
jQuery often uses "data-blah" as an attribute- that isn't any more or less valid than "dojoAttachPoint". And the general point is that Dojo can do a lot more than jQuery- for one, it works outside of the browser. A library like MooTools is the same. jQuery is, at it's heart, a DOM manipulation tool. Dojo and the others are more complete libraries that aren't just for HTML.
It is not required by jQuery to use "data-blah" in any html tag. Developing a dojo widget requires me to break html validation. I can perfectly fine use jquery without the data-blah attributes. Yes dojo is a complete library and for 99% of the use cases for a web application, it is overkill.
So to answer the original question:
Does anyone actually think dojo has a future compared to the power that jquery gives to make your own "widgets" but far simpler than dojo?
The answer is: yes, it has a future in a wide range of places. But in the subset of DOM manipulation, it might be more appropriate to use jQuery.
Re: Dojo Toolkit 1.7 Released.
#8An app I use is still on dojo 0.4 because they rewrote the tree widget after 0.6 and the new implementation was missing features we depended on, I think it was different icons for leafs. Maybe time for an update now
Re: Dojo Toolkit 1.7 Released.
#9And not a single fuck was given. Does anyone actually think dojo has a future compared to the power that jquery gives to make your own "widgets" but far simpler than dojo? The simplest tutorials in the dojo documentation put html tags in the JavaScript code. Generating them like strings. It reminds me of the days when people would generate html (and javascript, oh god) using Java. Dojo is too big, too complicated and…
When was it that you used it? I haven't used it lately, and when I did I felt the same as you, but for what I've seen Dojo is no longer the "kitchen sink" it used to be. It's small, VERY modular, and has a lot of utilities and interesting things.
Not that jQuery doesn't have any of these. But jQuery was thought out as a DOM manipulation library and then people started sticking a ton of things on top of it.
Dojo is thought out as a modular toolkit, where DOM manipulation is just one of the libraries it includes.
Re: Dojo Toolkit 1.7 Released.
#10And not a single fuck was given. Does anyone actually think dojo has a future compared to the power that jquery gives to make your own "widgets" but far simpler than dojo? The simplest tutorials in the dojo documentation put html tags in the JavaScript code. Generating them like strings. It reminds me of the days when people would generate html (and javascript, oh god) using Java. Dojo is too big, too complicated and…
Dojo gets a lot of use in the corporate world because it's so complete, particularly in terms of GUI widgets.
I always use jQuery myself, but I'm still not satisfied with any of the jQuery grid components, for example. It's disappointing.