search

ericmckean / rietveld

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/rietveld
Apache License 2.0
0 stars 0 forks source link

Use jQuery for client side scripting #179

Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
trunk/static/script.js is 94k file with browser-specific hacks and 
workarounds, custom AJAX functions and strangely looking helper names. jQuery 
can help to reduce the size, but more importantly increase the speed and 
reduce maintenance and development time for client side features.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by techtonik@gmail.com on 3 Feb 2010 at 3:04

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
In case of a script.js rewrite I personally would prefer to use the closure 
library. It 
should provide everything we need (and may need...) without adding further 
plugins and 
it compiles down to a single slim JS file.

Original comment by albrecht.andi on 3 Feb 2010 at 7:51

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
On the first look closure library is an overkill. What are the chances that 
GSoC 
student can take part in customizing rietveld interface? Do users with JS 
knowledge 
have a chance to debug this slim JS without any specific tools installed? 
Closeure 
syntax seems more bloated than jQuery.

For jQuery developers you do not need to be familiar with OOP concepts. In case 
of 
Closure it seems to be a prerequisite. Not just Java, but you also need to get 
"javascript closure" concept as well. Many designers are using jQuery as a 
simple and 
intuitive scripting language to add dynamism to CSS selectors and not aware of 
these 
concepts at all. Closure therefore seems to have rather high barrier for 
contribution. Are there any significant benefits in it for rietveld? Can jQuery 
be 
used along with closure library? Is there some substitute for jQuery?

Original comment by techtonik@gmail.com on 3 Feb 2010 at 9:39

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by albrecht.andi on 6 Apr 2012 at 7:25