Forum: Ruby on Rails moo.fx / RJS / Rails

Announcement (2017-05-07): is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see and for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
F15fdc7cb2e911b3808837f2be244add?d=identicon&s=25 unknown (Guest)
on 2007-07-04 06:02
(Received via mailing list)
Is there any available way to integrate tightly with moo.fx instead of
Scriptalicous?  I would like to try and keep the JS light and the
moo.fxstuff looks a little nicer IMHO.  My issue is getting all the
integration that exists with scriptalicious to work in RJS and the other
rails functions.  Is this possible?
518db1803036fb7880be61666f50e004?d=identicon&s=25 unimatrixZxero (Guest)
on 2007-07-06 07:34
(Received via mailing list)
It is possible no doubt. But I think it is more work than it is worth.
You would end up practically writing every helper and component that
uses scriptaculous again for moo.fx.  If you do have too much time on
your hands you could put your effort out to the world. But my
experience is that neither moo.fx or scriptacolous are a big
difference. I've not noticed any speed increases in using moo.fx
instead of scriptaculous. And the fact that moo.fx alters the
prototype library in it's cause (AFAIK) always bothered me.

If you wan't to use another library for effects, you might want to
consider jQuery it works with scripaculous if you call <script ...>
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.