[dojo-contributors] what is the raison detre for dojo 2.0.

Rick Waldron waldron.rick at gmail.com
Thu Oct 4 13:32:35 EDT 2012


On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Tom Trenka <ttrenka at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm also not sure whether it's intended to replace all of the APIs you
>> mention... I see it as a shortcut for domConstruct.create basically, but
>> I'd sooner argue that domConstruct.create ends up with far more readable
>> (though obviously longer) code.
>>
>
> I see it as replacing create/manipulation code, but I don't see it
> replacing things like measuring code (like position/coords).  And I get
> that it can lead to difficult to read code; mostly I'm looking at it for
> ease-of-use and for performance reasons.  What I do like about it is that
> the syntax is primarily CSS3 syntax, and that leads to some great
> consistency (particularly in view of things like dojo/query).
>
> Anyway, I think the point of this discussion was not to digress into
>> feature lists.  I am still thinking about my answer, and that sorta
>> depends on which interpretation of the question was intended.
>>
>
> Yeah, sorry.  What I was trying to do was put out a list of requirements
> as a reason for Dojo 2.0.  Unfortunately that gets into features =(, but I
> think that at least saying "this is where we should be going" is a good way
> of justifying the need for 2.0.
>
>
IIRC, when I was first informed of Dojo 2.0, I was led to believe that it
would be ES5+ code, instead of ES3.

Rick



> -- Tom
>
> _______________________________________________
> dojo-contributors mailing list
> dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org
> http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/pipermail/dojo-contributors/attachments/20121004/256660e2/attachment.htm 


More information about the dojo-contributors mailing list