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

141–150 of 292 posts

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#141

Post by andrei_says_ »

mortenjorck wrote: post #79
cphoover wrote: post #6

Do people still use jQuery? I thought the biggest advantage of this library back in the day was css selector access of DOM nodes (back when we only had getElementById, getElementsByClassName, and getElementsByTagName). This has been rolled into the Javascript document api via document.querySelector, and document.querySelectorAll. Also there are browser compatibility issues that jQuery solved but a lot of these are so…

jQuery is like WordPress. There may be other more streamlined, purpose-built solutions out there, and they all have their uses, but sometimes ease of setup is the thing you're optimizing for, sexiness be damned. When you have a vast, mature ecosystem and a decade and a half of community knowledge to draw upon, even the most obscure use cases tend to have a precedent somewhere . Being able to jump right to a StackOver…

I’ve seen the code of Wordpress and would not touch the spaghetti cluster-f that it is.

I won’t even speak of the ecosystem built on the above principles.

All I can say is that a 1-click install does translate to popularity :)

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#142

Post by peterangular »

tambourine_man wrote: post #131
actuator wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> IMO, React doesn't bring much to the table in this regard while adding a lot of complexity and heft. Strongly disagree with this. In any complex web application with a lot of components, specially ones where a lot of fixed components can live for a while, React is definitely a massive improvement over vanilla JS or something like Backbone which allows wild west. Imagine state coming from sockets, rest APIs etc wit…

I'm exactly arguing against this Webpack, Typescript, React, etc approach to web development. I'm more productive in PHP + jQuery, a lot due to familiarity, of course, but I'm also a huge believer in a simple stack. If you've 20+ mutually dependent inputs, maybe you need a better UI, not a complex state management framework. If your browser is ultimately executing an untyped crazy dynamic language, is it worth trying…

> It all seems so crazy to me, but this ship has long sailed.

Nope. And it's why Svelte is something that I've been hard adopting because it looks the closest to old-school JS/CSS/HTML while still bringing some of the same capabilities over that I love from React and VueJS. It also runs without a VDOM or a constantly running event loop - both things are incredibly attractive to me.

Although it's not a perfect solution (nothing is) I would strongly suggest you checking into Svelte as it looks more like traditional web development vs. highly complex Webpack + TS + React + eslint + Babel etc etc-based development.

The ship hasn't sailed. Your instincts to be weary of such a complex, constantly re-invented toolchain to get traditional development tasks accomplished are a natural response to the craziness that these tools bring to the table.

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#143

Post by synergy20 »

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 free without using its full-blown SPA framework. However you do need master a lot more concepts comparing to jQuery.

React/Angular are both overkill for 90% use cases, unless you're doing a serious SPA that is.

For me it's between jQuery and Vuejs these days, I learn both, one reason I worry about jQuery is that it's losing some steam and the development is not very active. Still I'm excited about this new release.

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#144

Post by megous »

abhisuri97 wrote: post #31
cphoover wrote: post #6

Do people still use jQuery? I thought the biggest advantage of this library back in the day was css selector access of DOM nodes (back when we only had getElementById, getElementsByClassName, and getElementsByTagName). This has been rolled into the Javascript document api via document.querySelector, and document.querySelectorAll. Also there are browser compatibility issues that jQuery solved but a lot of these are so…

Yep. I still use it for side one-off projects here and there. For me, there's just something so convenient about being able to make a html page that you can drop in a quick CDN link for jquery and not have to worry about compiling, webpack, create-react-app etc. I'll still use React when something is a larger project with a ton of moving parts, but otherwise I stick with jquery. As for why I'm not using the native DO…

It's not that more complicated. There are after()/before()/closest()/remove(), and a lot of other similar easy to use methods these days.

It's not el.parentNode.insertBefore(new, el) and el.parentNode.removeChild(el) days anymore.

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#145

Post by sshb »

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...

Well, you are still getting less server load and faster response times across the globe, right?

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#146

Post by FpUser »

cphoover wrote: post #6

Do people still use jQuery? I thought the biggest advantage of this library back in the day was css selector access of DOM nodes (back when we only had getElementById, getElementsByClassName, and getElementsByTagName). This has been rolled into the Javascript document api via document.querySelector, and document.querySelectorAll. Also there are browser compatibility issues that jQuery solved but a lot of these are so…

>"Also for me, along with I'm sure many others, keeping state within the DOM has fallen out of favor of more comprehensible state management inside of JS (like React Hooks, Redux"

In my opinion using React / Redux combo for state management is a poor choice. So to each their own. The arguments like: everyone else including my cat does that do not make really it any better in my eyes.

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#147

Post by megous »

spiderfarmer wrote: post #35
niftylettuce wrote: post #13

I'm a happy jQuery/Bootstrap user @ https://forwardemail.net . The site scores ~100% on Lighthouse and PageSpeed Insights and is ranked #1. Open-startup @ https://forwardemail.net/open-startup ! Completely open-source too @ https://github.com/forwardemail

Yes but if you’re not using the latest JS framework how do you get girls.

You get a girl by going places where girls congregate at a similar or higher percentage to guys. Took me a while to figure that out... Anyway, I understand sarcasm, too.

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#148

Post by spyridonas »

tambourine_man wrote: post #131
actuator wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> IMO, React doesn't bring much to the table in this regard while adding a lot of complexity and heft. Strongly disagree with this. In any complex web application with a lot of components, specially ones where a lot of fixed components can live for a while, React is definitely a massive improvement over vanilla JS or something like Backbone which allows wild west. Imagine state coming from sockets, rest APIs etc wit…

I'm exactly arguing against this Webpack, Typescript, React, etc approach to web development. I'm more productive in PHP + jQuery, a lot due to familiarity, of course, but I'm also a huge believer in a simple stack. If you've 20+ mutually dependent inputs, maybe you need a better UI, not a complex state management framework. If your browser is ultimately executing an untyped crazy dynamic language, is it worth trying…

I'm on the same boat, super productive with php/twig/jquery. But recently my boss gave my a side project without any specific requirements, 10 charts and 2-3 tables with their associated crud. I made everything with react + php, and oh my god that site is super fast. It's eye opening!

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#149

Post by Tenal »

Klonoar wrote: post #122

I think jQuery is amazing, but one thing that I've found over the years is that the real killer for it was CSS animations becoming simpler to use and more widespread in terms of support. The final thing I used to reach for jQuery for was animation support, but that need is by and large gone now. AJAX/JSONP is good there, but to be honest it's not something that needs a wrapper these days. Glad to see the library is s…

CSS animations are a pain-inducing non-starter for thousands of recurring use cases.

Example: Using Javascript to SHOW a modal, but then relying applying addClass('animate') using CSS animations to transition that modal (eg: bottom of screen to center, while fading in) are nearly impossible without tons of hackery. The animations do not render.

Hence jQuery animation calls.

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#150

Post by [deleted] »

tambourine_man wrote: post #83
cphoover wrote: post #6

Do people still use jQuery? I thought the biggest advantage of this library back in the day was css selector access of DOM nodes (back when we only had getElementById, getElementsByClassName, and getElementsByTagName). This has been rolled into the Javascript document api via document.querySelector, and document.querySelectorAll. Also there are browser compatibility issues that jQuery solved but a lot of these are so…

>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…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN