[Catalyst] Is Catalyst large enough to sustain a book?

[Nilson Santos Figueiredo Junior]

On 4/29/06, Matt S Trout <dbix-class at trout.me.uk> wrote:
> Having used Javascript in-and-of-itself and become rather fond of the way the
> language works, I'd say dojo twists it the least - the topic on #dojo was "not
> trying to be anything but javascript" for quite a while and I personally agree
> with them.

The thing it's something almost philosophycal to define what a
language truly is.
The first time I saw Prototype's $ function, it seemed like something
unique to JavaScript. I actually started enjoying JavaScript after
discovering Prototype. Previously, JavaScript was something I just had
to live with, because there was no other reasonable alternative to
fill in the gap.

I really don't think that its pollution of the root namespace is a
major issue as long as you understand its mindset: you're supposing to
be using only it for "language extensions". If you can live with this
compromise and all of your other modules are self-contained, Prototype
is really good. But, if you're can't afford this, Dojo is probably a
better option.

I see this as something analogous to Catalyst's context object. You
seem to dislike the idea of polluting its namespace with convenience
methods. But, as long as you can live with some compromises, it's
really handy and doesn't amount to crappy, unmaintainable code, IMO.

I think I understand your POV and it's quite reasonable. However, I
really don't think Prototype deserves all that harsh words. Not due to
the author's efforts and all that crap but because it's really nice if
you're OK with its way of doing things. Dojo just provides another way
of doing things. There's not only one reasonable way of doing things.
Just because you don't agree with how something's done it doesn't
automatically means it's a complete joke technically.

-Nilson Santos F. Jr.