Thanks for coming over and getting more feedback on jQuery, Marty. The
community is very supportive of this project so anything that's written
which may not be 100% on target will be scrutinized. Even better,
though, is the fact that we try to work with the author in question to
ensure accuracy in the hopes of getting the information updated.
Thanks again for coming over and please feel free to ask any questions.
We're here to help.
Rey Bango
jQuery Team
martykube wrote:
On May 21, 4:22 pm, "Dan G. Switzer, II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Rey, I'm a little dense here, but not exactly sure what he is trying to say
with this line:
"However, it does not support a reusable programming model like an object
oriented approach, so you should not expect thousands of lines of JQuery
code to be a good asset to your project"
can anyone clarify. Is this a compliment or a knock against jquery?
I think they mean it as a knock, but I don't agree with the statement.
While it's true the plug-in architecture isn't a true OO model, you can
definitely build re-usable logic using the plug-ins.
And there's nothing preventing you to building all your code OO-based and
using jQuery to interact w/the DOM. In a nutshell, that's what jQuery really
is--a DOM helper.
-Dan
Hi,
I'm one of the authors of the article.
JQuery is obviously a solid product with a great following.
Here are my apologies for any offense given, no knock was intended.
You've raised some good points here. I'll post a comment on the
article back to this thread.
Regards
Marty Kube
