I also agree with TJ as I started developing before utility JS
libraries started becoming useful and had to manually code all my AJAX
requests (30-40 lines down to one - :-))
but because I had to code those requests manually I understand what
Ajax.Request is doing under the hood and it allows me to be a better
developer.

/rant
On a separate point - the classes that some potential applicants have
taken teach them to be completely dependent on the utility JS library
and to just drop in any widget/extension found on the web. This
sometimes will have unforeseen effects on the code and/or load times,
and sometimes the buy(or download) versus build question is never
considered.
/rant



On Mar 19, 1:40 pm, "P.J." <[email protected]> wrote:
> I agree with T.J. We shouldn't be simply teaching just how to use a
> certain tool but when to use them. And then learning JavaScript as a
> language rather than merely being exposed to it via libraries is
> beneficial because then your students will understand what the
> libraries are doing. I think this is similar to the difference between
> low and high level languages.
>
> As for there being multiple libraries to choose from: why can't we use
> both Prototype and jQuery libraries at the same time? They are both
> useful in different situations, and jQuery's noConflict helps resolve
> issues it can have with Prototype.
>
> I haven't tested other library combinations, though, and can only
> attest to the ability to successfully use Prototype and jQuery
> together in the same project.
>
> I feel that I should point out that one cost often cited when
> discussing the usage of multiple libraries or components is the
> increased size and bandwidth required due to including more components
> in any given project. With web applications that cost is often offset
> by caching and only a concern on initial page/website loads.
>
> Regardless, I wish you the best in finding topics you can teach in a
> field that is constantly changing. I am concerned with college
> programs that churn out "IT" type graduates with skills that can
> easily be replaced through outsourcing or a 6-week seminar focused
> solely on learning best use practices for a certain tool set.
>
> On Mar 19, 6:10 am, "T.J. Crowder" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Hi,
>
> > I find that either/or choices tend to be false choices. Not always,
> > but frequently enough that I've taught myself to stop and ask whether
> > it's really either/or. (Especially since my brain tends to default
> > that way -- either/or, black/white, right/wrong -- and so I have to
> > keep reminding myself that the world is more interesting than that...)
>
> > Perhaps a both/and solution? Teach the fundamentals of JavaScript and
> > DOM manipulation, then as an adjunct, do a section on how you can use
> > libraries to smooth out browser differences and get useful utility
> > functions, and that's when you introduce jQuery, Prototype, possibly a
> > couple of the others as well. There are a *lot* of libraries out there
> > besides jQuery and Prototype:
>
> > * YUI:http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/
> > * Closure:http://code.google.com/closure/library
> > * Dojo:http://dojotoolkit.org/
> > * Any of several 
> > others:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_JavaScript_libraries
>
> > You can even point out how they solve the same problems differently
> > (and how they solve other problems much the same way). You could
> > discuss the technical pros and cons of each, and talk about how
> > technical pros and cons do not always dictate project decisions like
> > we engineers tend to think they should -- e.g., there are other
> > factors to consider, like stability, pace of development, style of
> > development, etc.
>
> > That would (to my mind) more thoroughly prepare the students for going
> > out in the world and doing useful work, even if they end up using a
> > library that you hadn't shown them at all.
>
> > From a crass commercial standpoint, I have to agree with Yuval that
> > out in the marketplace, in today's world, right this minute, your
> > students will get more utility out of being familiar with jQuery than
> > being familiar with Prototype. *IF* you had to teach just one library,
> > but again, teaching one library isn't what I'd recommend anyway.
>
> > FWIW,
> > --
> > T.J. Crowder
> > Independent Software Engineer
> > tj / crowder software / com
> > www / crowder software / com
>
> > On Mar 19, 8:53 am, yuval dagan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Hi
>
> > > Although I used and will use prototype,
> > > It looks (to me) currently like JQuery is much more popular than prototype
>
> > > I say stick to JQuery but let them know about other frameworks.
>
> > > But thats only my opinion
>
> > > Yuval
>
> > > On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 4:58 AM, Ali.MD <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > Hi every1
> > > > I'm teacher of NIIT university
> > > > and teach web technology in our web department
> > > > I want to change and update some our courses
> > > > For example in section of javascript framework
> > > > We usually recommend jquery because its easy to learn.
> > > > But i thing Prototype & script.aculo.us are better in core and api
> > > > What exactly is the difference between these two in future
> > > > In support, popularity, features, developers ...
> > > > Do you recommend me to switch our web team developers to this ?
> > > > and/or students to learn this framework ?
>
> > > > --
> > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
> > > > Groups
> > > > "Prototype & script.aculo.us" group.
> > > > To post to this group, send email to
> > > > [email protected].
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > [email protected].
> > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > >http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-scriptaculous?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Prototype & script.aculo.us" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-scriptaculous?hl=en.

Reply via email to