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

Sasha Firsov suns at firsov.net
Thu Oct 11 14:26:11 EDT 2012


TT,
I missed the part of 2.0 === Nano/Core in this long thread.
Still we are talking about patterns which this foundation support and 
based on.

The development patterns used for "simple" developer and "enterprise" 
not just different but mutually exclusive. That is what I tried to say.
The calls chaining, modularization, etc where given as samples of dev-t 
patterns conflict.

Unless you are able to resolve the difference in requirements for 
"simple" and "enterprise" there is no point to talk to support both.
We need to list those requirements and see what is doable what is not. 
IMO there is no room for "simple" one.
 > Dojo Toolkit is *not* just for enterprise-level apps.
It is. The message should be:
DTK is for the enterprise-level apps. If you treat your page as such, 
even simple one will benefit of using DTK .

-s


On 2012/10/11 10:48 AM, Tom Trenka wrote:
> I'm *really* not sure what you're trying to say, so let me make it 
> clear where I'm coming from.
>
> Your application is a house.  You build that house on top of a strong 
> foundation.  In terms of using the Dojo Toolkit, that foundation would 
> be the Nano/Core.
>
> If you're going enterprise, you're probably using Dijit and/or 
> something like dojox/mvc to build the walls, the roof, and to a lesser 
> extent the decor inside and out.  BUT all of that is still built on 
> the foundation that is Nano/Core.
>
> What I am saying (and this is an old argument, btw) is that YOU DON'T 
> NEED TO USE DIJIT and/or something like dojo/mvc to build your walls. 
>  All the tools to do that are right there in Nano/Core.  If I didn't 
> need to build a house but maybe a lean-to, Core is more than enough to 
> handle that.
>
> And if you think for a minute that the guy who came up with one of the 
> original loaders AND the concept of JS objects as namespaces would do 
> something as stupid as try to pull a single jQuery-like $, you're daft.
>
> -- Tom
>
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 12:20 PM, Sasha Firsov <suns at firsov.net 
> <mailto:suns at firsov.net>> wrote:
>
>     -1
>     On 2012/10/11 9:44 AM, Tom Trenka wrote:
>     > we have the perfect opportunity to refine our messages to that
>     effect
>     > and start making it clear that the Dojo Toolkit is *not* just for
>     > enterprise-level apps.  Make sense?
>     Not at all. You trying to blend together completely opposite concepts.
>     Simplifying development and support zillions of enterprise-level app
>     requirements.
>     Please prove me wrong.
>
>     Those concepts are opposite to each other. That is why jQuery wins on
>     "simple" development and DTK on enterprise one.
>     The fine-grained modular development(AMD), theme switching,
>     localization, etc has a cost of understanding and development
>     complexity. Making each level efficient from implementation and
>     comfortable from developer point should be our goal. Not
>     simplification
>     or trying to adjust to "simple user" needs.
>
>     Lets recall what are the requirements of "simple" developer and
>     see that
>     many are not applicable to "serious" one.
>     - shortest code footprint. Tons of tricks to achieve but result is
>     mixing together all kinds of stuff making the code not manageable.
>     - Unified namespace by mashing all modules under same namespace( $.xxx
>     ). DTK went away far time ago. And even namespaces are deprecated in
>     favor of AMD.
>     - preserving same functional scope/context. As result it allows
>     chaining
>     $(...).(...)...  It assumes to carry functional scope through. Not
>     sure
>     why exactly it is bad, but something in my guts fill against it.
>     - absence of complex modules, templates in end developer's life. I.e.
>     developer could simply avoid modularization by having single JS
>     sufficient to run whole app.
>     - you add some own
>
>     IMO those are not DTK goals. If we clearly distantiate DTK from
>     "simple"
>     development it will hurt a bit of marketing. But eventually win due to
>     the "serious development" branding.
>
>     Just my 2c.
>     Sasha
>     _______________________________________________
>     dojo-contributors mailing list
>     dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org
>     <mailto:dojo-contributors at mail.dojotoolkit.org>
>     http://mail.dojotoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/dojo-contributors
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20121011/50adf49d/attachment-0001.htm 


More information about the dojo-contributors mailing list