Re: Is jQuery worth a second look?

kangax wrote:
On Sep 30, 12:13 am, dhtml <dhtmlkitc...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Conrad Lender wrote:
On 2008-09-29 08:09, dhtml wrote:
Absolutely worth taking a look at objectively. The code is taken quite
seriously by the industry, so it's a good idea to understand it and to
do that, it should be objectively reviewed.
It seems to have gained quite a bit of momentum, can it be considered
a reasonable choice for those who want to use a full-featured, well
supported library?


isFunction - still uses function decompilation. Kangax posted on
es-discuss that that was changed but I still see the isFunction in the
latest 1.2.6.


Garrett,
their trunk is using `instanceof` [1]. Wrapping a single operator into
a method seems like an overkill, but... whatever works for them. We,
in prototype.js, are more inclined to get rid of is* methods at all.
Having such "helpers" seems to solve very few (if any) problems.


Keeping isFunction is understandable for backwards compatibility. However, they don't need to keep using isFunction internally for that.

Of course it won't work across frames.


--
kangax
.