Develop Reference

Execution time for Core JavaScript vs jQuery [closed]

Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
If my purpose is served by core JavaScript only, should I use jQuery?
I mean if I use those libraries, will the application become slower or remain same?
If anyone have any reference, can you please share with me?

Yes, Sure
Actually AngularJS is also use jQuery Dom selection code for angular.element.
Its called jqlite.
Also for most of CSS framework like bootstrap, foundation jQuery is also required because most of utility is still built with jQuery.
AngularJS is also very powerful but sometimes its dependent on jQuery.
So you can use both of it on a single page no worries.

TL;DR: It really depends on what you are planning to do.
For example: A simple static webpage may not need angular or even jQuery for that matter.
A web application on the other hand can really benefit from using libraries/frameworks such as Angular and React.
A good rule of thumb is to use only what you need, not bloat up your project with libraries and dependencies just because.
You can achieve really good page speeds with or without frameworks, a good start is googling around and see what you want to use.

Yes using jquery or angular means additional code that needs to be executed, and that means a measurable difference in execution time, although usually not a noticeable time difference.
But that's the wrong question to ask
I don't know what application you have in mind, and how experienced you are, so ...
both jquery and angular provide a lot of stuff which may speed up your development time tremendously.
can you write code that contains fewer bugs, memory leaks, attack-vectors, etc. than these frameworks, which have already been used/tested thousands of times in production?
Are you sure you can write code that is more performant than these libs? Especially from jquery I know, that there are some pretty ugly corners, but can you do it better? I don't know your skill level.
browser compatibility: how skilled are you on that topic?
and at last, why reinvent the wheel?
Oh, and about performance in web-pages. A few years ago there was a statistic going around about performance, with the general summary:
js usually uses only about 15% of the performance/runtime.
something around 60-80% of the runtime is used to render the page
if you want to "improve the performance" of your JS, don't micro-optimize stuff, but check where you trigger render-cycles that can be avoided.

Oracle ADF vs a Javascript MVC framework like EmberJs or AngularJs [closed]

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I am starting a new project that has planned to use a large of Oracle components BEPL, SOA Suit, Oracle Spatial and Oracle ADF. I am trying to convince the team that a Javascript framework like EmberJs or AngularJs would be better. I feel like I might not be comparing apples to apple with EmberJs vs ADF. The goal of the project is to expose a large complex database to both our Web Front end and as an API. I think that a Javascript framework would work well with the data being exposed as an API instead of thought ADF where it might use a more proprietary connector.

Well.. comparing cars to bikes always look crazy. However sometimes you choose bike over the car. And sometimes you might want even reinvent the wheel.
However mostly it just shows lack of particular knowledge and very bad decision is trying to get rid of native, supported solution and start repeating it with the tools, you know better.
All oracle stuff now driven with ADF. There should be VERY strong reasons to abandon it. And you didn't provided any.

I'll be subjective with my answer here, as ADF is a very big framework and CAN be used along with EmberJS if you want to ditch the ADF Faces part, however here is my 5 cents into this
Using EmberJS from a Java Developer point of view
Pros
If done right, a great User Experience can be generated.
Very flexible front end development for your front end team.
More options when it comes to Deployment on servers as you don't need to work with Java EE container (I'm excluding the Service part of course).
Cons
Developers will need to learn EmberJS, Backbone or AngularJS
Developers will have to provide a great service layer, and controller in a way that all this JS Frameworks can interact with.
Developers will have to consider security constraints themselves as JS is not secure by default.
Development time will increase greatly and if you are under a deadline it'll be very hard to be met since developers will have to take care of everything themselfs.

This question interested me, so I made a tiny research. If you make a search on tags javascript + oracle, you'll notice that there are only 74 questions tagged. So these technologies do not actually intersect quite often in a real world and it's doubtful if anyone would provide expertise.
I'm learning AngularJS now and I'm quite certain that it's worth every minute I spend on it, it will be there for a long time and that it provides one of the quickest an intuitive developing experiences on the market. It requires learning, though, and even hair-pulling at times if you're a novice, like I was.
PS One of the killer arguments are the numbers for the tags in this question in the top-right corner.

Comparing ADF to JS is like comparing Servlets/JSP to JS. Makes no sense.
ADF generates JS as part of its page rendering, but also allows you to incorporate JS and JS libraries to extend and augment the ADF JSF page functionality.
I suggest you read a bit about JSF before making this decision...or comparison.
AND, if you're working with Oracle, specifically Fusion Apps, which is written in ADF and SOA Suite, (BTW: BPEL is one component of SOA Suite, not a separate product), then you have no choice but to use ADF.
Seems you have some study ahead of you.

AngularJS and Enterprise applications [closed]

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
we are currently evaluating the use of AngularJS in a Enterprise Application (e-Banking) as a Single Page Application.
Many of the devs#work are already convinced that there no other way to go. It is the trend, it is future proof (html, css and js) it is easy to do, less burden on the server etc etc.
Despite the interesting part of this framework, i am not convinced that there are factors that must be considered before going this road. These can be:
Maintainability of code
Testability of code, not only the ui part
Continuous integration (like TeamCity or TFS)
Developer friendliness like debugging, navigating through code
Security (if there is a risk)
Has anyone any experience on enterprise apps build like that? I would rather go with Asp.Net MVC4. Please no hypothetical answers, i don't want to start a war. Real life experience is really appreciated.
Regards

I had thought about this when incorporating Angular into our enterprise application. First, some optional background information. I really needed to keep all my page state on the client side since recreating it on the server side is a very resource intensive task. I started off with building it with just JQuery, since I only needed a few things, but soon I found myself having trouble keeping track of the callbacks I wrote just last week. Hence, I wanted to refactor. While I was at it, Angular looked like the best fit for my programming style.
To address your concerns:
I think that it is more maintainable, since it encourages you to split things up. This, however, depends totally on your team and your discipline to keep things maintainable.
The Angular team definitely thought about testing when they were making it. Things are very easy to test, from unit testing to e2e testing. Others have even found a middle ground in between.
We use Jenkins at our Microsoft shop for continuous integration since it was easier for us to plug in our own programs to make it work with our complex environment setups. However, I don't think this relates much to which framework you decide to go with.
Coming from Visual Studio, I find JavaScript in general leaves something to be desired. I love edit and continue, unwinding the stack, and dragging that yellow arrow around. That stuff is just pure magical bliss. Debugging on the browser just doesn't give you all of that.
Security is pretty good. Looking through the docs, you can see that the team is concerned with security issues such as XSS and CSRF attacks. However, anything done over the browser is hard to secure. There are new attacks and bugs discovered every other day. If you are really concerned about security, you wouldn't have an online app. You would make sure that your customers only banked in the branch with multiple forms of ID. With that said, I don't think Angular is any less secure than any other JavaScript solution.
I would like to raise another issue with all of these JavaScript frameworks/libraries. They're all fairly new and constantly evolving. Look at how many functions JQuery has deprecated recently, and you'll get a sense of how hard it is to keep on top of your libraries. Many of these are also forgotten and left to rot. Angular being one of Google's products also makes me a little scared, since they have been cancelling waves of their projects. Hopefully, Angular does not become one of those.
The documentation is also lacking. Although the community is good, the documentation is not. Many pages are half done. Again, compared to the latest stuff from Microsoft, the documentation is pretty sparse.
This being one of the new things, it is harder to hire someone to help/take over this stuff.
Despite all these drawbacks, I really like it, and I'm definitely going to push my company towards adopting it.

Yes I have used Angular with Asp.net WebAPI along with MongoDB .Pls find my findings
1)Testability is absolutely fantatic .You can easily test you unit test using karma and jasmine
2) CI. Integration of Jenkins is available with Karma
3) Easy to debug similar to Javascript debugging can use chrome extension Bartrang to debug angular apps easily

Can anyone suggest a good client-side architecture and structure for large scale web applications? [closed]

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm building a large scale web application. It will grow in the future so I need a good back-end and front-end architecture for my application. at the back of the site, I use Zend Framework so the architecture is OK for me. But at the front, working with javascript and ajax without having a good architecture makes later changes hard and confusing.
For now, I'm using my own architecture. I have a big object for the whole application say BigObject. I extend it when modules are added to the site. say I have an upload module. I use this:
BigObject.upload={
//initialization
init:function(){
},
//I tried to use what I named semi-MVC architecture!!!
controllers:{
//index is a controller
someController:{
init:function(){
//initialization
},
someAction:function(){
//Code goes here
//call a model if necessary
//call view script
BigObject.upload.views.someController.someAction();
}
}
},
models:{
//models required for this module like loading contents with ajax.
loadContent:function(part,callback){
}
}
views:{
init:function(){
//initialize view
},
someController:{
someAction:function(){
}
}
}
}
What do you think? Is there any better solution to this problem? anyone thought about a good structure for front-end part of web applications ( like what we have at back-end,good file structure and object-oriented methods )?

The most up to date answer to this question in 2020, would be to use React + GraphQL + Styled-Components. The best place to start with React is the official Create React App tool. Their are a few different implementations of GraphQL; on the client side the clear leader is Apollo. On the server you have a lot more choice and it is reasonably easy to even roll your own server implementation, so go with what work best with your current backend. Styled-Components gives you CSS in JS, in the same way that React gives you HTML in JS.
For a more complete and opinionated experience, take a look at Gatsby, which brings all of the above into a single framework.
Over the last couple of years a more functional style to writing JavaScript has become popular. If your not used to functional programming then it can be a bit of a steep learning curve to start with, but start by leaning about a library called Ramda.
Here are few links to get you started on functional JS
An introduction to functional programming in JavaScript
Thinking in Ramda
Indentation is the enemy: Writing less complex JavaScript
Mostly Adéquate guide to functional programming
When it comes to testing, then Jest combined with Enzyme is by far the best current option.
Finally for a much deeper answer, checkout this talk from Cheng Lou on the Spectrum of Abstraction.

Most of the answers are proposing stuff like jQuery, React, Angular, Vue.js... which are not frameworks, neither architectures. All of these libraries are layers on top of JavaScript. I just remind you that JavaScript is already a high level language!
Since the question is about a good client-side architecture and structure for large scale web applications, I would say that none of the previous answer solve the problem, and there is a reason for that :
There is currently no emerging or commonly accepted architecture for front-end JavaScript source code organization.
I already read dozen of blog posts, Stackoverflow questions, Youtube videos... I never found someone who detailed a generic, general and scalable architecture. The main reasons are:
front-end JS code is quite small regarding back-end source code, most of the developers do not need a scalable architecture.
execution is ephemeral, lifetime of JS is the same as web pages lifetime.
the problem for many developers is more about manipulating the DOM than structuring large JS code. This is why people answers are about libraries rather than frameworks.
I really expect that some day, someone will propose the first real JS architecture (like MVC for example). But in my opinion, this architecture will be more about event-callback than MVC. Before concluding, I'll suggest you the following ressources:
Imperative or procedural programming.
Functionnal programming (probably the best lead with modules)
Awesome videos of Fun Fun Function
JavaScript modules
To conclude, I'll strongly recommend to consider JS modules that have a great underestimated potential. This is not exactly an architecture, but:
JS modules organise your code
JS modules are scalable
maintanability is easy
JS module are reusable
Previous list isn't the main reasons why you need to organize your code?
Word to the wise!

A lot of people push for either Dojo or YUI for large applications. They are honest frameworks where most everything else you'll find is a library.
Personally, I tend to stick with jQuery. I create jQuery plugins or jQueryUI Widgets as needed. I've managed to push jQueryUI pretty far.
Everything falls in either $.fn.myPlugin or $.ui.myWidget. To me, this has the added benefit of pushing you to keep code very modular and portable (assuming you abide by jQuery/jQueryUI conventions).
$(element).myWidget({
color:'eggplant',
someValue:42
});
$.upload(args);

I was actually struggling with the same question for sometime.. after doing few large-scale projects, I thought of sharing my learnings as a reference architecture incase someone else finds it useful.
Have a look at http://boilerplatejs.org. It is not a library, but a framework that integrates some industry leading libraries with architectural patterns for large scale javascript development.

According to my understanding on the frontend i will ask you to use web-components that uses only HTML,CSS and JS.
No need to spend much time on understanding the other languages. If you take the latest UI frameworks or libraries like Angular, React they have built on web components.
You can customize your own components and use cases which you want to use in your project.When you are using frameworks it will take some time to load and follow up for few libs that are using.
JS you can use it any way you want. You can re-use these components in any number of projects once you have created.
Just look into webcomponents https://www.webcomponents.org/introduction you will get a clear idea. I hope this helps.

With the experience of scaling some of my content for million viewers in my application. But then I had to close the application for less profit and more stress in managing it (not the cost though, but the profit was not high enough to keep up motivation)
My architecture was:
Mithril.js.org library - Checkout mithril here for front-end
Twitter bootstrap front-end framework
Backend with "Laravel and started migrating some of the heavy write data to nodejs"
Redis as in-memory storage.
I was almost in a situation to move my storage to s3 before I shut down the app.
No jQuery - I kept my app jQuery-free ( I heard and read somewhere big app avoid jQuery, so without further investigation myself, I planned to remain jQuery-free as well, though I have no solid or bullet proof reason to avoid jquery)
I found mithril more interesting then react or angular, it was so easy to start and I was building while I was learning, it was damn easy and they claim, they are better than react, vue and angular in terms of size and performance.

My response would be to ask why you need this? I've worked on plenty of applications which make use of javascript, but one thing that I've learnt is that the best thing to do is to minimise javascript and most especially object orientated javascript to an absolute minimum. Web pages with large and complicated javascript tend to be slow, memory hungry and a pain to debug with all the browser variations.

How should I create a web interface for my application? [closed]

Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
First, a little background: I have written a little application in python with SQLAlchemy, which is roughly an improved RSS reader: it selects links that should interest the user, and shows them to him. I already have a very simple command-line interface, and I envision a variety of interfaces: web, instant-messaging, desktop...
For now I'd like to create a simple web interface, but I have absolutely zero experience in the matter (appart from making a simple php forum 5 or 6 years ago...). So I'm comming here for advice on where to start:
Is there a good tutorial on HTML/CSS/Javascript focused on making a website look good simply? I know about w3schools, but it's a terrible tutorial IMHO, since it teaches you about HTML/CSS but doesn't show you how to use them.
Should I use a javascript library? Which one?
Should I use a web framework? I'm guessing either not or a very lightweight one, since I already have an application core with a database and SQLAlchemy, and I don't want to drop it.
Any other advice?
Thanks!

I recommend that you use some kind of web framework, it will make things a lot easier. Since you already know Python you should look into Django framework. It seems that you can use SQLAlchemy with Django, see djange-sqlalchemy project.
I recommend using JQuery framework/library for Javascript stuff. It greatly simplifies coding and takes care of most web browser incompabilities.
This CSS tutorial seems to give you the basics.
I would start by reading the Django tutorial and start trying things out. I wouldn't worry too much about HTML stuff, you should be able to pick up enough from Django tutorial. Make your site first functional with HTML, Django and SQLAlchemy. Only then start worring about Javascript. Who knows, maybe you do not need Javascript at all?
Do not try make your site work and look good at the same time. When you are making your site work, use simple and ugly HTML pages. When you are making you web site look good, work only with static HTML pages and CSS files. It is easier to combine the two in the end.

Just like everyone else here, I'll chime in with "Use my favorite framework, because it's what I use...."
I would start with small goals for a web interface. Get something simple up and running that to make sure you understand how things work.
Write an app that responds to the following url and returns something.
http://localhost:8000/my_links
Once you understand the little bit of machinery it takes to make that possible, what is handed to you as far as information about the request, and what you need to produce to return to the caller, it should be come clear how to fill in the blanks to get from your existing application to data thrown at the web browser.
Learn WSGI for no other reason than most of the libraries that will help you build a web application utilize this to some degree.
One of the links from the above page that I found extremely beneficial in understanding how all this works. was Ian Bickings article "A Do-it Yourself Framework"
Once you get a grasp of that stuff, you may find that dealing with WSGI at such a low level is maybe a little too cumbersome. That's when you'll probably want something like WebOb
which is just one of several ways people have come up with for abstracting away the low level details of the request/response cycle into some convenient objects. In a sense encompassing the HTTP protocol without trying to make it make sense to someone who doesn't want to know what HTTP is.
Depending on the complexity of your application you may decide that handling a request, looking at the path and dispatching off to one of many functions is a drag you'd rather not deal with. This is where everyone's favorite framework starts to be beneficial. And I would suspect that you would know enough by this point to better assess the frameworks that are out there and determine which fits your needs and goals.
Lots prefer django, maybe you will too. Others prefer Turbogears, and or Pylons, maybe bfg, maybe grok, maybe zope, maybe plone. But no one here knows what you want your application to do.

It's an interestingly common mistake: all of the above answers provide technological advise on what's the best technology to do ... what exactly? You should work the other way around.
I think that if you want your application to be successful, you have to make sure it enables its users to get the most out of it in the most natural way to them.
Therefore, i suggest you first "storyline" how things should happen from a user's perspective. Use paper and pen, or more sophisticated wireframing tools such as balsamiq mockups.
So, first lay out what the experience should be, and this will tell you which technology will be the best choice to enable that experience.
Oh, and don't forget to read this.

HTML, CSS and JS Book: DHTML and CSS for the World Wide Web
Javascript Library: JQuery
Web Framework: Not sure, DJango?
Other Advice: Learn to write HTML, CSS, and JS in a a simple text editor with syntax highlighting. Complex IDE's are cool, but for this stuff, they will make you learn slower.

Web applications are not simple.
HTML and CSS: Head First HTML is probably a good starting point. The Head First series are usually excellent tutorials. As Josh said, write your pages by hand.
Javascript: you don't need this to get started. Maybe in a later version. When you have a better idea what you'll need Javascript for, you'll be better equipped to pick a library that suits your needs.
Web framework: You should probably start with Django. That's the opposite of a "very lightweight" framework, but in this context "lightweight" requires more expertise to make something polished. So it's a good idea to aim for "feature rich and well supported" instead.

Here is another option, I feel it's worth mentioning before making any decision.
As web framework I would advise web2py, it is very easy to setup and yet powerful. Here is a document showing the differences between Django, web2py and some others. It is somewhat old but will give you a good overview.
Since you have legacy code, if you really want to keep it there is a fair compatibility between the two although you should double-check. The easiest would be to adapt your code, of course, the differences aren't so big. But that's your call :-)
Regarding the Javascript library, probably jQuery.

The best introduction you could follow is the opera web standards curriculum. Some of the information will be too basic - but a full understanding of all the topics covered will give you a very good grounding.
http://www.opera.com/company/education/curriculum/
Alternatively team up with someone who specialises in front-end development.