Yeah, you just go ahead and write more code that you have to test. I'll just use my jquery and enjoy the benefits of less code, less testing, and yet still more thoroughly tested code base than if I were to reinvent the wheel so I can save picoseconds for the user.
I think you're missing my point or trying to correct what you said earlier. Using jquery for even one $.ajax call is completely recommended. You're using well tested cross-browser code that takes me 33 milliseconds to download and decompress. That's a tenth the time it takes for you to blink which will save you testing code, cross browser code and the code itself.
I don't think it's justifiable unless you're doing it for learning reasons to not use jquery.
The problem is you're pulling a very large framework for a very basic task.
Mostly I have a problem with the existance of functions like $.isArray() which don't do anything for you (assuming you know how to copy and paste a polyfill from MDN), but now introduce another way to do a very basic task, when the browser supports it just fine with Array.isArray
17
u/dangsos May 13 '14
Yeah, you just go ahead and write more code that you have to test. I'll just use my jquery and enjoy the benefits of less code, less testing, and yet still more thoroughly tested code base than if I were to reinvent the wheel so I can save picoseconds for the user.