On Apr 25, 2007, at 11:52 AM, Michael Peters wrote:
Boysenberry Payne wrote:
One of the draw back that seems to be evident to me as I've looked
into the client side frameworks is changes in the code are ought
of your control. WIth a purely server side solution it would seem
to give the coder the choice to upgrade when there is time, etc.
With the 3rd party frameworks they choose when you upgrade.
For the more stable solutions this is less of a problem. For the
newer technologies I've heard a lot of grumbling about having
to recode every time there is an upgrade...
Huh? The JS in your project is always under your control. It's just
like any 3rd
party component (like CPAN modules). You only upgrade it when you
want to. The
only case that I know of where people pull in 3rd party JS
components that
aren't locally controlled are those that use YUI and pull in their
publicly
hosted files. (And this is only to boost download time since if
every site using
the YUI libraries uses the same URL, a browser should just be able
to use a
cached version). But even then you can specify specific versions.
It was Yahoo's yui-ext library aka extjs that I was told this could
really be a problem
with. So I guess all JS frameworks aren't created equal.
Can you recommend a site or resource for comparison of the differing
frameworks?
It would seem like there is definitely a place for this in our
product, saving me lots of development
time and all.
PS Sorry for the non mod_perl noise. I'm hoping its well tolerated,
in that I use mod_perl
extensively and need to learn integrate it with other non-mod_perl
tech, e.g. it
serves up my JS, etc...
Boysenberry Payne
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
