This has been a troubling question ever since I started working with PrototypeJS (2006) and then discovered JQuery, etc.
Somehow, for reasons of my own, I like PrototypeJS far better. I think the appeal of JQuery is in it's documentation. I think they make it somewhat idiotproof, and their site looks pretty cool for web- designers who are more sold on looks rather than semantics, or other programming benefits. I have tried using no conflict version of JQuery and it works fine unless you try their "plugins" which are often developed without the no conflict version in mind, or so I thought. I think PrototypeJS suffices for everything that can be achieved but sometimes, if you are not a purist, you might want to use other APIs in the same project. An example is EXTJS. I have also read somewhere PrototypeJS is better in terms of size and speed. I recently came across yet another library by a Russian guy which claims to beat all existing libraries hands down (just can't remember the URL, forgot to bookmark that one)... and then there's UIZE... the question really ought to be, what's the best JS API out there... and why? In my opinion, PrototypeJS is in the top 3 or 5 and no matter how fast JQuery is updated, or it's usage is more popular among webmasters, PrototypeJS is much better in fundamentals and approach. On May 1, 2:33 pm, lvdesign <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello, > For me the problem is actualy > Why are you using Prototype when jQuery is more efficient, intuitive > et en plus more developed? > And remember you, jQuery accept other library with .noConflict() > And you can manage RoR with > jQueryhttp://jimneath.org/2008/06/18/using-jquery-with-ruby-on-rails.html > > So for me try to do something with Proto is a challenge because jQuery > is so smart. > > cordialy > LV > > On 1 mai, 02:45, "joe t." <[email protected]> wrote: > > > The short answer is that there's no short answer. There's not really > > anything that either library can do that the other can't. It's mostly > > a question of the requirements of the project, or familiarity with > > either library's approach, etc. > > > There's no conclusive answer & any answer you do get will be loaded > > with facts about each, but no single knockout argument to use one or > > the other. > > > -joe t. > > > On Apr 29, 2:22 pm, kstubs <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Why Prototype over JQuery? I am an avid fan of Prototype and have never > > > used JQuery, but JQuery seems to be so popular. Is it just that, popular? > > > I love prototype, and learning something new and magical every day it > > > seems, but is there something *better* that Prototype does that JQuery > > > doesn't, or vice-a-versa? > > > > Karl.. -- 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.
