This is that api I propose. If it is agreed upon by core team then a
patch can easily be created.
# create a demo app with prototype javascript
# in this way current behavior is not changed
rails init demo
# create a demo app with latest stable jquery
# GitHub - rails/jquery-ujs: Ruby on Rails unobtrusive scripting adapter for jQuery should have a jquery-versions.txt
file which lists all the stable releases of jquery. That file will be
referred
# on runtime and the latest stable version will be found which would
be 1.4.2 as of this writing
rails init demo -j=jquery
# create a demo app with jquery version 1.4.1
rails init demo -j=jquery:1.4.1
# create a demo app with mootools version 1.2.4
rails init demo -j=mootools:1.2.4
Once this kind of api is in place then I don't care what is the
default JavaScript library that ships with rails.
But you are talking perceptions, and the sample talks numbers.
Of course 16% has to be taken with some margins, but you can't deny it
makes difficult to claim that the vast majority of Rails developers
use jQuery exclusively, which was the claim in (1). That is a strong
claim! (1 was originally stated as a feeling not a fact, that's fine).
If the percent had been 84% then there would be no doubt about it,
right? But < 20%... dubious.
But it turns out the 84% seems to support that the vast majority are
using Prototype, no matter which is our termometer.
Hey, I am not saying people can't advocate jQuery because of a series
of reasons. I am only raising a flag about this claim about the
perceived user base.
I think in reality, most rails developers end up using both; prototype because it's the default, and jquery because of the large library of plugins. I do think that supports a move to using jquery as default, despite preferring prototype myself.
Of course 16% has to be taken with some margins, but you can't deny it
makes difficult to claim that the vast majority of Rails developers
use jQuery exclusively, which was the claim in (1). That is a strong
claim! (1 was originally stated as a feeling not a fact, that's fine).
If the percent had been 84% then there would be no doubt about it,
right? But < 20%... dubious.
But it turns out the 84% seems to support that the vast majority are
using Prototype, no matter which is our termometer.
I completely disagree, just because people don't use jrails, doesn't
mean they're a prototype user. I generally bring in jQuery manually
and delete all the prototype cruft from my projects, but I then write
my own jQuery code to do specifically what I want, ignoring Rails
helpers.
You can't assume that 16% jRails = 16% jQuery - it would be true if
that was the only way of using jQuery with Rails, but it so blatantly
isn't.
This is why I stated that once Rails 3 comes out, it should be easier
to get some "real" numbers on this, since presumably it will be just
as easy for developers to use jQuery as it currently is to use
Prototype, and those users
who actively program in Javascript rather than just using the helpers
will consciously decide to use one or the other.
I would suggest it's a bit late to change the default option at this
time, and if the decision is left for 3.1 it can easily be based at
least in part on real-world numbers that nobody disputes.
The problem is to gauge which percent does that represent. Do you
claim that there's a 50% of people using jQuery exclusively without
jRails to be able to sum up say 70%?
My hypothesis is that that percent is small, and this is of course
speculation. But speculation based on the fact that generally speaking
one prefers to keep the helpers if the cost is as cheap as installing
jRails.
I am not claiming 16% is the exact figure, this is a sample, there's
that other variable. What I say is that the numbers do not seem to
**support**, to bring some evidence in favor of (1), on the contrary.
Xavier, I for one never use jRails -- in fact, neither do most of the
rails devs i know. We do, however, use jQuery.
The JavaScript helpers in Rails 2.3 were rather ugly, from a jQuery point
of view, which probably explains why not that many people felt like using
jRails.
I personally disagree. With a limit backwards compatibility, current
Prototype users could have a simple command line switch to regain
their old default. Furthermore, I feel that the default JS library is
the least coupled piece of Rails 3 -- changing it is rather
unobtrusive, as long as bindings are available for the major
frameworks.
Why? SQLite3 was made the default database in 2.0.2 and the world
didn't stop. It's a change that affects people creating new Rails
applications - not ones that have already been created.
I'm a big fan of jQuery too but maybe at this point it would be nice
to take an issue off the core team's table. At the end of the day
Rails 3 is still going to work great no matter what the default is.
Why? SQLite3 was made the default database in 2.0.2 and the world
didn’t stop. It’s a change that affects people creating new Rails
applications - not ones that have already been created.
There’s a big difference between changing the default database system and changing the default javascript engine. For a very basic example: Model.create will work the same on whatever database system you’re using where $(‘blog_1’) will behave differently depending on the javascript engine.
I see your point.
I’m a big fan of jQuery too but maybe at this point it would be nice
to take an issue off the core team’s table. At the end of the day
Rails 3 is still going to work great no matter what the default is.
Indeed and I’ll agree with Yehuda here. 3.0’s gotta be out soon, right?
We discussed in this thread usage stats. Usage stats seem to favor
Prototype, though of course it has been the default since the
beginning and that matters.
On the other hand, stats about what people prefer *now* suggest that's
clearly jQuery:
