Re:Why MooTools (or Why not JQuery)
by thomasmallen on Thursday October 02, 2008 @09:09AM
(#321672)
What is this crap?
* Heard of $.extend?
* jQuery also feels like JavaScript.
* Modular...that's a good one. Very modular when it clobbers the most basic prototypes and wrecks your namespace. Everything in jQuery exists in the jQuery object.
* MooTools documentation is pretty bad. I abandoned the library because figuring out how to do anything was a chore. And there are no books on it.
I like the last argument the most: MooTools is better because it's less popular.
I wouldn't write a post arguing jQuery over MooTools, but I sure wouldn't include MooTools in all but the most animation-intensive projects because of the severe compatibility issues it causes when including non-MooTools scripts.
* Heard of $.extend?
* jQuery also feels like JavaScript.
* Modular...that's a good one. Very modular when it clobbers the most basic prototypes and wrecks your namespace. Everything in jQuery exists in the jQuery object.
* MooTools documentation is pretty bad. I abandoned the library because figuring out how to do anything was a chore. And there are no books on it.
I like the last argument the most: MooTools is better because it's less popular.
I wouldn't write a post arguing jQuery over MooTools, but I sure wouldn't include MooTools in all but the most animation-intensive projects because of the severe compatibility issues it causes when including non-MooTools scripts.