Forum: Ruby on Rails [ANN] Introducing Fork: a new JavaScript library for Rails 1

Announcement (2017-05-07): www.ruby-forum.com is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see rubyonrails.org/community and ruby-lang.org/en/community for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
Peter M. (Guest)
on 2007-01-19 17:30
(Received via mailing list)
Hi,

Fork release 0.1.0 is official!

I've been hard at work for months to develop core JavaScript libraries
for use with Rails. The Fork code is namespaced and similar to the
Yahoo! UI philosophy. Fork includes the RJS and Restful Routes tricks
needed to work smoothly with Rails. I've included a Rails plugin with
helpers for Action View.

The Fork code is tested in 29 browsers and has workarounds for browser
bugs not found in any other JavaScript library. I haven't found such a
stable library anywhere.

Fork is designed to work with Rails 1.2 and released on the very same
day.

For more info . . . http://forkjavascript.org/

Peter
--
blog: http://peter.michaux.ca/
Kjell B. (Guest)
on 2007-01-19 17:30
(Received via mailing list)
Congrats! I just went thru all tests and it looks pretty complete. I
havent looked at the code yet, but i will do so later. Besides that,
may i suggest to strike out the paragraph against sam stephenson in
your Why? part and replace it with "i just dont like prototype" ?.
There is no need to bash someone else work or to criticise how someone
spents his sparetime to justify your effort. Leaves a bad taste
behind. No offense.

Just my 2 cents
Sam S. (Guest)
on 2007-01-20 00:09
(Received via mailing list)
Hi Peter-

Congratulations on your first release.  I'm sure it will prove to be a
worthy alternative for those not satisfied with Prototype.

All the best,
Sam
Christophe P. (Guest)
on 2007-09-26 00:37
(Received via mailing list)
I'm glad to see another library out there, especially one so bent on
quality (which certainly isn't to say that Prototype isn't).  I
certainly wish Fork a lot of success, although I do, personally, intend
to stick with Prototype.

However, I think the whole first paragraph in "Why?" is a disgrace.
It's pure, gratuitous bashing, and could very easily be worded in
positive form rather than negative (e.g. move "Prototype is poorly
designed and poorly coded" to "Fork strives for superior design and
coding," go from "Prototype does not play well with other JS libraries"
[when indeed many work fine with it] to "Although there are
incompatibilities between Prototype and Fork," etc.).

It's also sometimes actual diffamation.  As one of the guys who do work
intensively with the Rails Trac and Prototype patches, I sure know that
the bleak picture painted in this text is not the truth (although it is
a fact that we don't commit patches lightly).

I have a lot of respect for Peter's technical expertise, but I'm apalled
at his utter lack of tact, mine-has-to-be-bigger-than-yours attitude,
not to mention basic respect for what remains original, inspiring work.

--
Christophe P. a.k.a. TDD
"[They] did not know it was impossible, so they did it." --Mark Twain
Email: removed_email_address@domain.invalid
Robin Haswell (Guest)
on 2007-09-26 01:11
(Received via mailing list)
Christophe P. wrote:
> but I'm apalled
> at his utter lack of tact, mine-has-to-be-bigger-than-yours attitude,


But I thought that was a foundation of Ruby/Rails marketing? If
37signals have taught us anything, it's that if you want your library
adopted you don't need technical superiority, you just have to claim it
while slagging off your competitors.

I find the paragraph funny. You reap what you sow.

-Rob
Christophe P. (Guest)
on 2007-09-26 01:11
(Received via mailing list)
Hey Robin,

Robin Haswell a écrit :
> But I thought that was a foundation of Ruby/Rails marketing? If
> 37signals have taught us anything, it's that if you want your library
> adopted you don't need technical superiority, you just have to claim it
> while slagging off your competitors.

I must say I never read stuff by 37s that said "others suck" (except
DHH's "PHP is the devil" phrase), I only saw stuff like "If you don't
like our way of doing things, use something else."  While still a strong
attitude, this is an entirely different thing to say.  Tech-wise, that
is.  "Getting Real" is full of bashing on *concepts* (functional specs,
meetings), but not on specific *techs*, I believe.

But then, there may indeed be many places where they bash other stuff to
promote their tools/techs, that I just never saw.  Still, while DHH in
particular is very opinionated and can be harsh sometimes, I don't
remember reading/hearing such stuff.

At any rate, wherever that kind of bashing happens, it's condemnable, be
it done by 37s or Peter.  I see this on Fork's *homepage*, for crying
out loud, and that alone is sufficient to give me a strong prejudice
against using the lib altogether, regardless of its likely merits.  It's
irrational, but it's so.

--
Christophe P. aka TDD
removed_email_address@domain.invalid
Ryan G. (Guest)
on 2007-09-26 01:11
(Received via mailing list)
Your post was written poorly. My post shall be teh gooder than all. It
will
include words that I have not seen anywhere else, like pffforkit. It
will be
a post designed from the ground up to be stable, factual, and long
winded. I
have been working on this post for minutes. One reason why this post is
superior to yours is that, well, I wrote it. Another reason is that,
well,
prototype sucks. I don't care that your post is clearly understandable,
fairly intelligent, and yes maybe even poignant. All I care about is
that I
can write a better one.

I have taken the time to break my post into more than one paragraph,
like
many other posters before me. I just think it makes a lot of sense this
way.
So when you read this post and think, "Well, it's OK, but pretty much
anyone
else in the world can write one that's a lot like it, and in fact many
many
people have already written other posts with paragraph breaks that
others
were able to read, comprehend, and even put to practical use," just
remember
one thing: prototype sucks.



On 1/19/07, Christophe P. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> I must say I never read stuff by 37s that said "others suck" (except
>
> >
>


--
Ryan G.
Application Development Consultant
Athena Group, Inc.
Inquire: 1-920-955-1457
Blog: http://www.someElement.com
Kjell B. (Guest)
on 2007-09-26 01:19
(Received via mailing list)
made my day, lol.. priceless

On 1/19/07, Ryan G. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> many other posters before me. I just think it makes a lot of sense this way.
> > Hey Robin,
> > attitude, this is an entirely different thing to say.  Tech-wise, that
> > out loud, and that alone is sufficient to give me a strong prejudice
> > Application Development Consultant
> > Athena Group, Inc.
> > Inquire: 1-920-955-1457
> > Blog: http://www.someElement.com
> > > >
> >
>


--
Kjell
-- www.m3nt0r.de
Colin Mollenhour (Guest)
on 2007-09-26 01:19
(Received via mailing list)
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
  <meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Couldn't have said it better myself! Is there any JS framework that
doesn't borrow *heavily* from Prototype, yet claim to be superior?<br>
<br>
Ryan G. wrote:
<blockquote
 cite="mid:removed_email_address@domain.invalid"
 type="cite">Your post was written poorly. My post shall be teh gooder
than all. It will include words that I have not seen anywhere else,
like pffforkit. It will be a post designed from the ground up to be
stable, factual, and long winded. I have been working on this post for
minutes. One reason why this post is superior to yours is that, well, I
wrote it. Another reason is that, well, prototype sucks. I don't care
that your post is clearly understandable, fairly intelligent, and yes
maybe even poignant. All I care about is that I can write a better one.
  <br>
  <br>
I have taken the time to break my post into more than one paragraph,
like many other posters before me. I just think it makes a lot of sense
this way. So when you read this post and think, "Well, it's OK, but
pretty much anyone else in the world can write one that's a lot like
it, and in fact many many people have already written other posts with
paragraph breaks that others were able to read, comprehend, and even
put to practical use," just remember one thing: prototype sucks.
  <br>
  <br>
  <div><span class="gmail_quote"></span>
  <blockquote class="gmail_quote"
 style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt
0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
-- <br>
Ryan G.<br>
Application Development Consultant<br>
Athena Group, Inc.<br>
Inquire: 1-920-955-1457<br>
Blog: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.someElement.com">http://www.someElement...
    <br>
  </blockquote>
  </div>
</blockquote>
<br>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~<br>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups &quot;Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs&quot; group. <br> To post to this
group, send email to removed_email_address@domain.invalid <br> To
unsubscribe from this group, send email to
removed_email_address@domain.invalid <br> For more options,
visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs?hl=en <br>
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---<br>
</body>
</html>

<br>
Martinez, Andrew (Guest)
on 2007-09-26 01:19
(Received via mailing list)
Ryan, even though I still consider you my arch-nemesis (jokingly) on
this list, that post, was so freaking awesome. I am sure my co-workers
will all be wondering what made me laugh so loudly.


Cheers,
-Andrew Martinez
Ryan G. (Guest)
on 2007-09-26 01:19
(Received via mailing list)
:)



On 1/19/07, Martinez, Andrew <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
>
> library for Rails 1.2
> will be a post designed from the ground up to be stable, factual, and long
> people have already written other posts with paragraph breaks that others
>
>
>
> >
>
>


--
Ryan G.
Application Development Consultant
Athena Group, Inc.
Inquire: 1-920-955-1457
Blog: http://www.someElement.com
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.