I am really big fan of jQuery, but I don't see it as a framework for a site, more like a library. I am looking for some sort of framework that will give me the tools to build really structured applications in javaScript. I have found backbone.js, but find it somewhat confusing. Is that a good one, and are there others similar to it? an MVC pattern would be really cool, but I havent found anything.
I use currently RightJS with RequireJS. It has worked out well for my purposes. I used jQuery + jQuery UI previously. The current combo fits my style better (more barebone functionality instead of just DOM wrapper + UI plugins).
I know RightJS isn't that popular. The docs are adequate and the author is responsive. This makes up for that. :)
Some other alternatives:
qooxdoo
MooTools
Prototype
I'm sure there are plenty of more alternatives. It really comes down to your preferences and exact needs.
Personally I have been looking at Sencha's offerings (ExtJS, Sencha Touch) lately. The latter is particularly interesting as it provides simple means to write cross-platform apps for mobile devices. Works great in iPad at least!
The Google Closure Library & Tools is pretty good, and is the framework they use to build Gmail, Google Maps, and so on.
jQuery and YUI 3: A Tale of Two JavaScript Libraries is a story about a jQuery developer that found that YUI3 was more "framework-like" and apt for his project.
I've been using YUI2 for years and it never disappointed me.
If you like dynamic OOP languages like Ruby/Python, you should really check RightJS. It is very compact, fast and simple. RightJS is built fully on OOP paradigm and allows you to implement serious stuff in a serious but not boring way.
As for the dom part, it doesn't exactly uses MVC as is, but RightJS has OOP dom-wrappers, with inheritance and so one. That provides basically the same result, but with much less headache.
And if you're particularly interested in patterns, check this out https://github.com/rightjs/rightjs-patterns :)
Related
I'm looking for a simple Javascript framework for my Chrome extension development.
I'm using jQuery and jQuery UI, but as my project grows, my orientation in the code is worse. So I need some kind of consistent MV* framework that is really simple&lightweight, popular (because of help and tutorials) and that could be used with jQuery and jQuery UI (or the framework could contain anything similar). Any ideas? Don't suggest me TodoMVC - I tried it and every implementation except jQuery is unnecessarily complex.
For structuring your javascript application, I suggest using Backbonejs. It's lightweight, and it even uses jQuery, so you should feel quite at home. Assuming you need richer widget than what is built into the browser, instead of using jQueryUI you may want to look into "Twitter Bootstrap", which is quite pleasant to work with, looks great and already supports responsive applications (which may or may not be necessary for your Chrome Extensions). I also believe it is a lot more lightweight than jQueryUI, but I really haven't looked into that in detail on my own. The same combo also works great for traditional web pages, web apps, single page applications and even works quite well on mobile devices.
You've tagged your question with Knockout.js - have you found any compelling reasons not to go with that? I've been using it extensively in conjunction with jQuery and jQuery UI, it plays nicely and has plenty of clean extension points. There is a big support community on here and elsewhere, and the documentation is excellent. I'd highly recommend it.
Backbone is the winner. I found the best resources.
I want to use a javascript framework with MVC for a complex web application (which will be one of a set of related apps and pages) for an intranet in a digital archives. I have been looking at SproutCore and JavascriptMVC. I want to choose one framework and stick with it.
Does anybody know what the distinguishing features are when comparing these two?
I want something that is simple, straightforward that I can customize/hack easily, and that doesn't get in my way too much, but that at the same time gives me a basis for keeping my code nicely organized, and event-driven. I also plan on using jquery substantially.
I know sproutcore is backed by Apple, and looks like it is getting more popular by the day, and it has a nice green website :), whereas JavascriptMVC looks less professional, with less of a following and less momentum behind it.
I've done the tutorials for both and I was impressed by SproutCore more (in the JMVC tutorial you don't really do anything substantial) - but somewhere in the back of my mind I feel that JMVC might just be better because it doesn't try and do too much - it just gives you MVC functionality based on a couple of jquery plugins, and you can use jquery for everything else, so its flexible. Whereas SproutCore seems to have more of its own API etc... which is also nice in a way... but then you're kind of stuck within that.... hmmm I'm confused :).
Any thoughts would be much appreciated.
Being a JavaScriptMVC contributor, I'm extremely biased. But I'll try to give the best answer I can.
JavaScriptMVC has also taken years to develop. But instead of focusing on ui functionality, it focused on the layers just below that. There are a few reasons for this:
You can find a jQuery widget to meet almost every need. There's no reason to compete these plugins. Instead, JavaScriptMVC tries to work with them.
Most people need one or two custom widgets / controls. JavaScriptMVC wants to make building and maintaining these pieces as easy as possible.'
Flexibility+API. I'm not sure exactly how to say this one ... but here's my best shot ... With JavaScriptMVC, we wanted every layer of the application to be as easy to understand and maintain as possible. This is why we picked jQuery as our low-level library. It's API is about the best abstraction for the dom possible. People typically go directly from the low-level API to build the Widget/Control. This is why most jQuery widgets' code look very dissimilar. We wanted a middle layer that organize our code and promote best practices, while providing enough flexibility to meet almost any requirement. So with JavaScriptMVC, you get very solid low and middle-level layers. But, you don't get widgets.
JavaScriptMVC has testing, error reporting, and documentation baked into the framework. The testing is the most impressive part. It has integrated selenium and envjs testing.
My recommendation would be to go with SproutCoreif your requirements can be built pretty straightforward with SproutCore. But if you know jQuery, have to build a lot of custom controls, or need really awesome testing, use JavaScriptMVC.
Funny, because just a month back or so, our team evaluated exactly these 2 frameworks head to head. We ended up choosing JavaScriptMVC, and I've been working hands-on with it for about a month.
I like it ... but, I was a HUGE proponent of SproutCore. I had never heard of either framework before we eval'd them, but once I saw SproutCore and looked under the hood, I was very, very impressed. Honestly, I don't think there's anything out there that can give you the kind of power it gives. Yes, you'll have a learning curve, but it's the kind of thing that lets one person accomplish the work of 5 or 10 once you know it.
So I'd use SproutCore in a heartbeat.
That being said, JavascriptMVC (aka "JMVC") is nice. It doesn't really give you a ton on top of jQuery itself. You will still have some infrastructure to build yourself (depending on how complicated your requirements are). This is both a pro and a con. One nice thing about it is that, if you need to dig into the details of some piece of JMVC, you can ... it is not so incredibly huge that it is impenetrable.
In summary, there's not a thing wrong with JMVC. But there is, in my opinion, nothing even in the ballpark with SproutCore.
I think that the main difference between them is that SproutCore includes a GUI while the JMVC is something low-level without any graphic, so if you need a GUI you can't use JMVC without including other scripts like the jQuery UI or jQuery plugins.
You said that "JMVC might just be better because it doesn't try and do too much" i don't agree with this, it took years before SproutCore 1.0 was released, so developers had the time to make a great product.
I suggest you to use SproutCore, maybe you'll have to learn more things, you'll spend more time to practice and understand everything, but you'll learn how to use a very good framework that can be usefull also for future projects.
Sproutcore-2.0 eliminates the ui-constraints and plays nice with completely custom app-uis.
http://blog.sproutcore.com/announcing-sproutcore-2-0/
http://blog.sproutcore.com/dispatches-from-the-edge-dropping-in-a-sproutcore-2-0-application/
I am currently using JQuery and recently heard about RightJS. RightJS seems to be faster, lighter & more object oriented. But I was wondering if RightJS has somethings seriously missing compared to JQuery (Other than the huge plugin base).
Update:
I tried RightJS in a small web project & decided to use it on a few more projects. But I would still stick to JQuery till I am confidant about RightJS. So far RightJS seems to be doing all the things I do with JQuery (mostly ajax & selectors).
Nahar,
Nikolay, the author of RightJS is here. Couple of notes.
1) Mentioned above jQuery size is incorrect because 24k is the size of the gzipped version. Gzipped RightJS weights 14k.
2) I believe the_drow just don't know what he's talking about. RightJS has all the same as jQuery, Moo, Dojo or Prototype. More of that in RightJS you have things like classes, advanced form-features and cookies already packed into those 14k when jQuery has those things as plugins.
Then RightJS also has custom builds http://rightjs.org/build
As for dojo, I tried it on two projects before, and if you would ask me, I would say spare your time, jQuery is better.
The only problem with RightJS is that it's still an underground and we are still growing the critical mass of users, so occasionally you'll have to use your own brain instead of googling answers.
First of all jQuery currently weighs 24KB and rightJS weighs 30KB which means not as lighter as jquery.
Generally, when choosing amongst javascript frameworks, you consider these aspects:
Selectors
DOM traversal
DOM manipulation
Utility functions
Event handling
Ajax
Other than that, one of the most important factors are:
active/continuous development
community support
More Readings:
http://trends.builtwith.com/javascript
SideNote: Thanks for letting me know about RightJS :)
If you want something faster and more object oriented try the dojo toolkit.
RightJS seems nice but it's like any other minimal toolkit. I believe it's very lacking comparing to the big guns like jQuery, Dojo and Mootools.
With Dojo you can plug a datastore just about to any widget and communicate with the server side easily.
It has all of the quering capabilities jQuery has and also has a custom build process to include only what you need.
It it considered faster then jQuery in certain browsers/use cases but both are great.
There's nothing wrong with jQuery.
Both Dojo and jQuery has great community support and are continually developed.
If you are developing webapps Dojo is the right toolkit for you as it has a very comprehensive UI library.
Just check out their website.
See also this wikipedia page.
Aside from the framework, is jQuery worth using rather than creating your own javascript? I've always debated if the framework was better to use than to create your own calls. Are their disadvantages of using it?
Sorry for beginner question, I'm trying to feel out if it would be better to use this and create some of the ajaxish workings of my site rather than develop it from scratch.
Are there other frameworks out there that would be better to use to create an ajaxish website?
Yes, jQuery is worth it. I speak as someone who resisted using any library for a long time, then finally saw the light.
I do recommend that you build some hand-rolled Ajax interactions before you dive into using jQuery for Ajax, so that you understand exactly what is happening with Ajax. Once that's achieved, though, let the library do the dirty work.
jQuery (and most other framework) are for making difficult things simple. It keeps you from having to write cross-browser compatabile code. It keeps you from having to write recursive methods to update multiple dom-elements. It basically cuts your development time down substantially, and saves you a lot of frustration.
Stackoverflow Archive:
Which Javascript framework (jQuery vs Dojo vs … )?
Great discussion (with lots of involvement) over various javascript frameworks. It will benefit you to browse this in depth, or even at a cursory level.
When should I use a javascript framework library?
Which Javascript Framework is the simplest and most powerful?
What JavaScript library would you choose for a new project and why?
Which Javascript Ajax Framework is most powerful and very lightweight?
Which javascript framework can be used for all browsers?
If you like reinventing the wheel, write your own. For me, I prefer to spend my time focusing on solutions rather than lines and lines of javascript code. I'll use JQuery to save resources and frustration
One thing I want to add is for the past couple of months, I was trying to fill a web developer position for my team, and it proved to be a difficult task.
Lots of folks knew how to use a JS framework (JQuery, ExtJS, YUI...), but once outside of the framework, they found themselves in an unfamiliar ground. I had a self-claimed senior JS developer with over 10 years of experience couldn't tell me how to use function.call() or function.apply() or how to implement simple inheritance in JavaScript.
Framework is great and definitely useful, but you will also want to make sure to know how to implement the basic OO concept and DOM manipulation without the framework.
BTW, we use ExtJS and if you are starting to pick a JS framework, you may want to look around to see which one suits you the most.
jQuery is a big project with many users. By that nature, it will be better tested than anything you write by yourself.
It is a great framework for most uses I've come to need.
Is there anything in particular you are trying to do?
jQuery helps you avoid worrying too much about cross-browser JavaScript issues, and helps you get things done quickly. As far as I'm concerned, the key reason for using it vs your own hand-rolled JavaScript probably is the "don't re-invent the wheel" cliché.
Apart from added productivity, JQuery's main plus is that it takes all (most) of the pain out of cross-browser testing.
There is no reason you cannot write your own code and splash in JQuery where needed. JQuery is incredibly lightweight for what it provides and you will quickly find that you can do most takes easier in JQuery (especially once you start using the plugins for it) than by hand. I am a big believer in not reinventing the wheel. The JQuery code is tested by tons of people and there are so many plugins to chose from I could almost guarantee that what I want to do has already been done before.
If you are starting with a clean site, now is the perfect time to take JQuery for a spin though, because if you do get hooked on it your code will be more consistent if you solve similar tasks using the same technique. Go give it a try :)
I would highly recommend using jQuery (or any comparable framework) over straight JavaScript. It just makes common programming tasks easier, most notably cross-browser development.
jquery makes js related work easier and more important standardised/compliant.
If you need re-assurance as to its use:
MS & Nokia are bundling it in their dev platforms.
Its compatible with many of the newest web technologies.
It has a large developer community supporting it.
There are many plug-ins available to aid RAD.
and more...
Give it a go!!
Definutly! Jquery wil save you a lot of time struggling over code and makes your code easier to read to non-experts.
I am a .NET webdev using ASP.NET, C# etc... I "learned" javascript in college 5+ years ago and can do basic jobs with it. But I wonder if it is useful to become proficient in it.
Why should I learn Javascript?
Is it more advantageous then learning JQuery or a different library?
Yes, definitely learn Javascript before you learn one of the libraries about. It's the whole walk-before-you-can-run thing.
Make sure you add these sites to your bookmarks:
Mozilla's developer site: This contains the reference to the Javascript API in Mozilla. This will help you make sure you're writing code that Firefox understands.
IE's site in Microsoft Developer Network: The same, for IE.
W3's reference of DOM for HTML: In most web applications today, the Javascript code manipulates the DOM, which is an internal keeping track of the objects displayed on screen (but you already knew that, right ?) This is the reference to the DOM API. It is language neutral, which means it does not target Javascript, but these methods exist in Javascript too.
Douglas Crockford' site: Doug Crockford is THE MAN when it comes down to Javascript. The articles in his page are a must read. Because Javascript has closures and first-class functions, he believes it is closer to Lisp and Scheme than to other languages. And he teaches you how to greatly improve your code with these language features.
Yahoo Developer network: You may also want to check this. I'm not a regular visitor to this site, though, so I can't really say much about it.
Yes, absolutely you should learn JavaScript if you are doing web development. I highly recommend JavaScript: The Good Parts, by Doug Crockford. And, JQuery is a great framework to use (this site uses it) -- it kind of depends on what you are trying to do -- YUI and ExtJS are also very nice.
The answer is simple.
Hands down yes. There's a reason that Google have made such a big fuss about the V8 JS engine for Chrome, why Mozilla are working on TraceMonkey for Firefox and why Webkit have been working on Squirrelfish for a while (now Squirrelfish extreme). It's because JS is becoming more popular by the day.
Javascript is one of those languages that spending a few hours learning will probably teach you 99% of what you will ever really use. I would imagine you are at the point in your learning of javascript that you know more than enough now and just learn one or more of the frameworks now.
I would recommend brushing up on your non-frameworked javascript first. Refreshing/learning basic concepts of dom manipulation and what not. Like learning how to build a linked list, stack or queue in C++ before learning how to use the STL (standard template libraries).
In addition to brushing up on straight javascript, it might be good to get into a framework that doesn't abstract and change the way things work so much, for instance Prototype. You code with it very much the same way you code with straight javascript. Read through the Prototype code, learn how to make classes, and do some fancy stuff. From experience, I can say reading through the Prototype.js helped me learn alot.
After messing around a bit, then I'd say go for jQuery. If jQuery didn't, literally, change the way you write code I'd say go for it first, but learning how to build classes and js inheritance and what not can be a very important lesson for someone who wants to become fluent in JS.
Learning javascript is recommended for any web application developer. Why?
You will better understand the possibilities, limitations and dangers related to developing a web application
It is a boost for your career, if you are working on a web application that has a user interface.
However, learning javascript is usually a trade-off between a programming language and another. You should consider whether javascript is relevant for your career or project.
Unless you want to really get into javascript, I think you'd be better off learning enough JS to leverage one of the tried and tested javascript libraries out there.
One thing nice about JavaScript is that it is quite different from mainstream languages such as C#, VB.NET or Java. Learning it, especially if you have occasions to use it, will give you another insight on programming, and that's always good. I think it's worth learning it.
If you are doing web development then at some point you are going to get exposed to Javascript or ECMAScript at some point in your career for any one of a number of reasons. At a minimum you should know enough Javascript to be able to be able to validate user input; however, the web is moving in the direction of using more an more Ajax so you should also know enough Javascript to properly leverage one of the major libraries out there such as jQuery.
As some of the other users have noted, you can learn most of what you need of Javascript on a day to day basis in a single day or a couple of afternoons. If you want to get more advanced with Javascript then you are going to have to invest much more time in learning the language but odds are that unless you seek out this type of work that you are not going to encounter something that a preexisting library doesn't already exist for.
If all you want is to do some simple UI-effects and the like, I suggest you just pick a library and go for it!
Using libraries eliminates all the flawed implementations of JavaScript and provides you with an API which is the same across all browsers. And if you're working together with others it is also a great way of implementing code-standards and best practices.
Learning a second programming language is always good.
By the sound of it, JavaScript is a language that you use, to it will be of practical use too. As a web dev, it has been recommended to me in a review that i learn at least basic JavaScript.
A library such as jQuery is essential for web development thse days, so you could learn that too.
I don't think a lot of deliberate learning makes sense (but of course you need some basic knowledge), but I also think after some years of web development you'll become pretty proficient in the language anyway :)
If you are a webdev then yes, you should be proficient with Javascript. Javascript is a major part of making web apps as interactive as desktop apps.
With that being said, learn to use one of the cross-browser compatible libraries like JQuery, Prototype, etc. We do not need to have any more single browser crud created using Javascript, just because any real man/woman rolls their own.
A few things to learn in Javascript:
1. Basic syntax
2. The various flavours of function declaration.
3. Passing functions around and how to use passed in functions.
I recommend Jeremy Keith's books: DOM Scripting and Bulletproof Ajax. After you become more fluent in JS I would recommend a JS library(I use jQuery, but that is not important).
JS is important to learn. You cannot use a framework without the proper understanding of how it works. That is doing things backwards.
i thing you should have a good knoloedge base of language specification and DOM (Document Object Model). it means,you shoud know how find/create "page object" an edit properties. Also you should have an idea of "object oriented" javascript tecniques, which the starting point of a lot of framework. you don't need learn specific framework if you don't use it. simple keep in mind generic base concept!
I'll go with the opposite answer most are putting out there. Learning javascript as a developer these days is almost pointless. The language is similar enough to java/C# that it's syntax and semantics shouldn't be lost on you.
What you should learn is jQuery.
As you use jQuery you'll pick up the most common things you'll ever need from javascript anyway.
If you're involved with the Web in anyway then the answer is "Yes, always". Maybe an embedded or system's programmer could get by without JavaScript, but not a webdev.
Most of the libraries are designed to alleviate some of the pain of interacting with a multitude of browsers. They will not abstract away core JavaScript functionality.
Yes, you should learn JavaScript. Sooner or later you will need to use it!