[Cosmo-dev] How we declare (pseudo) Classes in JavaScript

[Matthew Eernisse]

-1 on this.

I object to this for a couple of reasons.

Technical grounds:

1. Perf -- this adds more indirection and code execution. Our UI code is 
already slow, and we need to be making it faster, not slower.

2. Stability -- we picked Dojo to do some very specific things (data 
transport, events, pub/sub, packaging, build), and are already going to 
have to do a bunch of rewriting because they rewrote the toolkit and 
broke compatibility.

I would be really reluctant to build in even more dependence on Dojo, 
especially for something as ubiquitous as how we define our business 
objects.

Social grounds:

There is a class of developer who is not particularly familiar with 
Dojo, or interested in doing everything in their code with the Dojo API. 
I am a fan of Dojo, I think expecting something that low-level to be 
done the Dojo way will be very offputting to those people -- people we'd 
like to recruit to help us hack the Cosmo UI.

I also count myself in that group -- unless there's some specific, 
technical benefit, I myself strongly prefer standard, idiomatic 
JavaScript for declaring pseudo-classes.


Matthew


Travis Vachon wrote:
> +1
> 
>>
>> Dojo provides us with a nice solution to the manual labors of 
>> inheritance, I think we should standardize on it.
>>
>> Bobby
>> _______________________________________________
>> cosmo-dev mailing list
>> cosmo-dev at lists.osafoundation.org
>> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/cosmo-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cosmo-dev mailing list
> cosmo-dev at lists.osafoundation.org
> http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/cosmo-dev
>