Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft and Nokia Adopt OSS JQuery Framework

Posted by timothy on from the ms-could-become-the-largest-open-source-vendor dept.

soliptic writes "The jQuery blog today announced that 'Both Microsoft and Nokia are taking the major step of adopting jQuery as part of their official application development platform.' So the open-source javascript framework will be shipped with Visual Studio and ASP.NET MVC. Microsoft's Scott Hanselman notes: 'It's Open Source, and we'll use it and ship it via its MIT license, unchanged. If there's changes we want, we'll submit a patch just like anyone else.'" There's also a story at eWeek about the decision.

2 of 126 comments (clear)

  1. Just makes sense... by Max+Romantschuk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Javascript frameworks deal with the major hurdles of modern web design: Abstracting browser differences, and avoiding reinventing the wheel with the kind of AJAXy effects that are increasingly more common these days.

    I wonder how this will affect Prototype. It's always had different design goals than jQuery, but will this diminish it's popularity?

    Also, will the jQuery API eventually be integrated into the browser instead of being a huge JS blob for every page?

    --
    .: Max Romantschuk :: http://max.romantschuk.fi/
  2. Re:pity JS is crap to start with by Sancho · · Score: 3, Interesting
    The programming language itself has many, many problems.
    • It's a fully functional language which uses a syntax almost identical to C.
    • It implements the awful === operator.
    • Boolean values can be True, False, Undefined, or Null (this is a side effect of being weakly typed)
    • It tries to be easy to program by assuming end-of-statement operators (';') at certain places if the function wouldn't otherwise parse. This makes it incredibly difficult to debug. I truly consider this a bug in the design.
    • It's a weakly typed language with a strong understanding of type. By this, I mean that any variable is actually a reference which can hold values of any type (though they're all just objects anyway.) This isn't so much a bug as a design decision, but it's important for understanding the below--
    • null.typeof returns 'object'. So does Array.typeof. That's just ... dumb.
    • The object which 'this' references has several different meanings depending upon the context.

    So those are only a few of the issues. It feels like it's trying to be several different languages all at once. Coupled with the issues above (particularly the inconsistent use of 'this' and the implicit semi-colons), well frankly, if any design could be considered buggy, I'd say that it's Javascript's.