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

31–40 of 292 posts

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#31

Post by abhisuri97 »

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 DOM api's...I could, but haven't gotten around to learning that syntax since I'm very used to jquery (being specific, if I want to do things that are more complicated than selecting an element + changing its properties, the native API is more complicated). jquery is just a nice default.

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#32

Post by jariel »

For those wondering, JQuery is still used on the majority of web sites in the world apparently [1]

I'm not sure how the data is run, but it's quite massive share however you cut it.

JQuery is still in it's foundational phase, it's still a 'core' thing, it's not remotely legacy yet.

[1] https://almanac.httparchive.org/en/2019/javascript

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#33

Post by TimTheTinker »

pier25 wrote: post #4
newsbinator wrote: post #3

> We still have our eyes on a jQuery 4.0 release, but until then we will continue to support the 3.x branch and address important issues.

This caught my eye too. What could they be cooking?

My guess is a slimmed-down API with most or all support for older browsers removed, perhaps something similar to Zepto.

There is still something to be said for the usability of jQuery's API for direct DOM manipulation, as opposed to the more verbose API offered by the DOM itself.

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#34

Post by spiderfarmer »

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…

Daily.

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#35

Post by spiderfarmer »

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.

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#37

Post by Sulamitachica »

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

Nice open start up page! Congrats on success, will be signing up for the free plan with my domain!

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#38

Post by tenryuu »

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…

I dropped it a long time ago for similar reasons to only using selectors. It was not worth adding the extra request and execution time for what was really now a vanilla feature.

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#39

Post by dr-detroit »

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…

any popular library is already cached in everyone's browser and therefore *ANNIHILATES* the performance of every character of .js code you've ever written including inline

Re: jQuery 3.6.0

#40

Post by frabert »

bcrosby95 wrote: post #27
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…

> This has been rolled into the Javascript document api via document.querySelector, and document.querySelectorAll. Have you actually compared the two methods in a real website? It's like saying why use Ruby when you can use Java. The Javascript document API is super verbose. No thanks.

How so? Who stops you from doing something like `const $ = document.querySelector`?
Post reply on HN