Emad Ibrahim - Latest Comments in The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

Jeff — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 19:58:00 -0000

jquery, dojo, and prototype also have free hosting of the javascript libraries through a cdn (content delivery network for faster speed).

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

rkssaravanan12 — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 05:09:00 -0000

hi ,

My point of view JQUERY is the best javascript library for the dynamic website. The jquery has syntax ,easy to learn and good manual.

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

Shady — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 07:48:51 -0000

Nevertheless, you can hotlink jquery from google CDN directly and use it in your applications.

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

tamimi — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 05:15:18 -0000

The problem with Extjs, is that is not totally free, which make the developers try to avoid it

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

eibrahim — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 08:40:20 -0000

My JavaScript knowledge has increased significantly since I wrote this post
and I can tell you that now I only use jQuery and I don't need YUI for their
UI anymore.
Plus jQuery has significantly improved its UI-related stuff just check the
gallery at www.jqueryui.com

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

steve — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 04:41:52 -0000

I disagree that YUI is beautiful. In fact I think all of the libraries are overly replicated with bloated code and long names. Their widgets are not efficient, intuitive, innovative and they are barely optimised. Many don't even provide for xhtml validity. The reason you like Jquery is because it cleans out the garbage that the equivalent - YUI creates. Jquery is incredibly optimised and so easy to understand when looking at the code. So Jquery doesn't have all of the features of say - scriptaculous, or dojo, and thank god YUI. A good javascript programmer can extract the code from other libraries and use them with Jquery. As for prototype, I think it paved the way forward as a major stepping stone in javascript libraries, but jquery is twice as optimised and has taken the essential functionality from it, and left out all the dangerous functionality like - currying for example. Prototype provides a whole load of features that I would never want to use and never want to have to troubleshoot in someone elses code. Much like php, which provides an incredible amount of features that would scare a .net developer through poor programmatic practice.

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

mondongo — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 16:50:37 -0000

try EXT JS !

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

Bob — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 23:03:39 -0000

totally agree,prototype is too intrusive,meaning if you use it,you can't play others meanwhile.

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

Kavih — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 16:18:23 -0000

This site seems to use both jQuery and ExtJS: http://www.browsernotincluded.com They built a desktop app that allows 3rd party developers to build web modules in javascript. jQuery is used to parse the DOM and ExtJS is used for the user interfaces. Pretty cool IMO.

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

malcolm coles — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 15:29:42 -0000

With no javascript experience whatsoever, I managed to get the jquery slider panel working on my mum's website (http://www.sabc.co.uk/st-albans-office.html) - so I don't know about the others but Jquery gets my vote!

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

Eric Miraglia — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 16:31:07 -0000

Great discussion and many interesting points made in the comments. I would add only the following regarding the Slickspeed measurements: Be careful of conflating Slickspeed results with overall library performance. Slickspeed measures the performance of a selector engine against a specific DOM structure (relatively long, not too deep). Your results will vary if your DOM structure varies. More importantly, element selection via the selector engine is just one small aspect of library performance. Slickspeed tells you how Selector engines perform against a specific task; it does not give you insights into the overall performance of library code.

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

jhuni — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 20:23:03 -0000

I agree about YUI I actually use it because it is good for modular code and separating the user interface from the application logic (MVC) none of the other libraries seem to have that advantage.

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

Rod — Thu, 25 Dec 2008 23:31:34 -0000

Ext JS is my favorite. I've tried them all, JQuery, YUI, Dojo (ugh - I really tried, just couldn't get my head around it) Its a coders lib, not a designers snippet library.

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

Binoy — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 01:46:44 -0000

Extjs Extjs Extjs

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

kevin — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 12:18:15 -0000

Framework with beautiful widgets. (best i have seen so far) -> mix jquery with extjs widgets and you got a perfect library.

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

Patrickz — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 07:16:35 -0000

Where is Ext-js? :D

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

eibrahim — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:38:09 -0000

wow... that is a really cool... Thanks for the link.

I think using both jQuery and YUI is the way to go. I can use jQuery for
all my manual script writing and just limit YUI to User Interface stuff -
which is where it really shines.

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

H.Guliyev — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 10:00:43 -0000

http://mootools.net/slickspeed/
At least, This shows that YUi is the slowest. That is the biggest problem I have with it.

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

KiLVaiDeN — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 11:26:09 -0000

YUI is very powerful, but I don't find the documentation "that good". In fact, it's quite troublesome for some functions to browse the api and find out what the "OData" parameter is... Well after some practice you find out quite quickly, but it's not crystal clear. YUI has a great support for grids and such which is quite exciting too.

I like the prototype documentation and syntax, and jQuery is a clean library that's for sure. Extjs is a good option too, but it's not free for commercial use.

In the end of the day, I'd still prefer YUI because it has a great support in the person of Yahoo, and it works pretty well.

K

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

dave — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 17:04:28 -0000

not evaluating GWT was your second mistake. choosing asp.net was your first.

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

Emad Ibrahim — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 10:20:42 -0000

@peter: Do you have any links or reference to support your claim that jQuery is faster?

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

Peter Bengtsson — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 20:45:07 -0000

Execution speed is important for me which, last time I checked, I think jQuery wins at.

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

Pat Nakajima — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 20:21:30 -0000

Prototype includes quite a nice unit testing framework actually: http://github.com/sstephenson/prototype/tree/ma.... There's a runner written in Ruby that allows you to automate the running of your test suite in different browsers.

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

vlad — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 18:02:54 -0000

if good documentation is important to you, don't use dojo.

Re: The Best JavaScript Library | Emad Ibrahim

Emad Ibrahim — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 16:09:14 -0000

@Duncan: thanks for the tip - I didn't know. I wonder how fast do they get new versions to Google code for hosting???

@Mladen: jQuery minified and zipped is 16kb. And according to this chart http://ajaxian.com/archives/yui-setting-the-rec... YUI will be at 8.9kb. without animation and drang and drop and 18.4kb with them. So size is not that big of a deal - specially if it is hosted for free :)

@Dan: I might actually do that. I love jQuery's syntax too much to completely give it up. I am glad to hear that you are already doing that and not having problems.

@Ross: Never heard of JSTR but I will check it out. thanks.