Array.js: A better array for the browser and Node.js

Re:Array.js: A better array for the browser and Node.js by emn13 on Friday February 15, 2013 @06:33PM (#5229440)

It's also likely to be inherently hard to optimize; aka slow and will stay slow. I thinks it's a generally bad idea. It also undermines what limited tooling there is for JS; and it exposes Yet Another set of semantics - what exactly does that query do, how is it translated, what are the corner cases etc.

Very Bad idea. (And for what - avoiding a few characters that are so common as to be trivially skimmable and very gzippable?)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Array.js: A better array for the browser and Node.js by erikpukinskis on Saturday February 16, 2013 @04:47AM (#5231034)

What do you think about jquery selectors? Do the same objections apply?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Array.js: A better array for the browser and Node.js by nadaviv on Tuesday February 19, 2013 @07:21PM (#5248129)

I think they do too. I used to fall-back to vanilla DOM queries sometimes when I started using jQuery, because it didn't feel quite right, and I always worried about the performance hit... but I ended up always using CSS selectors, unless there's a good reason not to.

I think the main difference is that the value proposition of CSS selectors is just better than of the string-function syntax, so its worth it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Array.js: A better array for the browser and Node.js by aurelianito on Saturday February 16, 2013 @09:22AM (#5231542)

CSS selectors also give me this bad feeling when used in javascript code.

[ Parent | on HN ]