|
|
|
|
|
by azangru
1492 days ago
|
|
jQuery was a useful abstraction when browsers had inconsistent and clunky apis. Modern browsers have apis that are about as convenient as jQuery's, are standard across browsers, consistent with the language, and guaranteed to outlive jQuery the library. Aside from dot-chaining in a monadic sort of way, jQuery offers no benefit to the developer, while costing about 30kB of javascript. |
|
There's absolutely no reason to believe that considering those APIs add new features independently of each other. A library like jQuery can serve as an intermediary if browser A implements new feature X that is possible in browser B but through excessive (and slow) DOM manipulation.
jQuery can act as a bridge between the time browser A's implementation and browser B's.