Comments on: The Dollar Safe Mode

By: rasmus

rasmus — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 22:44:29 +0000

Well, that’s one more item that can be removed from the “Stupid Reasons Not To Use MooTools™”-list! ;)

By: Pete

Pete — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 20:55:47 +0000

What’s up with the ™ ?

By: kamicane

kamicane — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:17:53 +0000

@atwork8: It isnt called "moo" or anything like that because in MooTools $ is just another utility function, used more often that the others, sure, but still an utility function. $ isnt the "main" object for our entire framework. It targets elements that are in the document, so document is the logical parent object that should contain this function.

In any case, you can assign document.id to whatever var you prefer, like this: var whatevr = document.id.

By: atwork8

atwork8 — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 23:37:39 +0000

@Fábio - Yeah document.id is significantly more verbose than $. Like you say $ doesn't suggest what the function does at all, which is why I think "moo" is as good a substitute as any. You could argue that document.id isn't much better, if you have to put in brackets "(short for identify)" then maybe it could have been named more appropriately, and you could as easily do: moo ($ alternative). To be honest though it's hardly an issue, I'd just do what I do in JQuery and use a closure if required. I was asking more out of curiousity why document.id and not something shorter, that was all.

Anyways, still loving working with MooTools, thanks for sharing it! :o)

By: Fábio M. Costa

Fábio M. Costa — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 23:01:46 +0000

@atwork8 document.id is more verbose IMHO. I mean, what a function called moo does? (almost like $ if it wasn't so spread)

I often use this kind of functionality like @ricardo said in his comment.

Its nice to see useful post like this.

Mootools FTW!

By: Tony

Tony — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 22:16:52 +0000

This great. We’ve had a lot of people wanting to use mootools with the concrete5 content management system, but the edit mode of the CMS is currently bundled with jquery.

By: atwork8

atwork8 — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:26:59 +0000

Congrats on the latest release, looking good!

Why not just use "moo" instead of "document.id"? It's only one more key stroke than "$". Just a thought

By: moonkiki

moonkiki — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 19:42:08 +0000

innovation is often behind semplicity…

By: Thomas Aylott

Thomas Aylott — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 18:19:35 +0000

Is there a DollarSafe™ mode for the stock market?! Also want to implement it on the subway.

By: ricardo

ricardo — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 17:18:57 +0000

Just like jQuery.noconflict(), good to see other frameworks worrying about compatibility. I'd use it like this:

(function($){ this.X = new Class({ initialize: function(element){ this.element = $(element); } }); })(document.id);

By: Nikola

Nikola — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 16:34:54 +0000

Although I rather share your thoughts on using only one framework/library I have always liked jQuery’s noconflict() because it gives more freedom to users and developers. Congrats on the Dollar Safe Mode (tm).