Skip to main content

Knowledge Base

The best way to get going with any language is to start with some existing code; tweak it, extend it, rewrite it, and break it. It's good to have some background information for that effort though, which is where Javascript references come in handy.

If you want just the facts without third-party interpretations, go directly to the ECMA 262 (EcmaScript) standard. Like many standards documents, though, it can be very dense for a programmer. ECMA 262 is written as though the reader's job is to implement a Javascript compiler, which means you can count its primary audience using just your fingers. Although ECMA 262 serves as the Supreme Court for correct Javascript behavior, you're better off going to a lower court for intelligible opinions.

By far, my favorite dead-tree book on Javascript is O'Reilly's Javascript: The Definitive Guide. It includes a thorough overview of language features, plus a comprehensive reference section for Javascript functions and objects. Every programmer should have a copy of this book and give it a good looking-to.

Every programmer's dirty little secret today is that Google serves as the primary language reference. That works pretty well for a quick check of the parameters for a particular object, but I do have a few favorite reference sites. The one at W3Schools is pretty comprehensive, but in the process goes into detail about features you'll absolutely never need, like new Boolean(value). The DevGuru guide uses a very different organization but is also relatively comprehensive. However, it also has some errors in the details that I'll cover in future entries.


Popular posts from this blog

Tragedy of the WebKit Commons

With Opera announcing that their future products will be based on WebKit, the Internet is abuzz with discussion about what that means and whether it's a good thing. Looking at it as a jQuery developer, it's a good thing if it gets WebKit participants to fix bugs and update older implementations. I can't be optimistic without some evidence that things are really going to change. We don't know how many of Opera's core developers will move to WebKit development, but the press release isn't encouraging:  "The shift to WebKit means more of our resources can be dedicated to developing new features and the user-friendly solutions."  I suspect they want some cost savings by eliminating Presto technical staff, or -- in the most optimistic case for their employees -- refocusing existing staff on the parts outside WebKit core that make browsers different. Opera did  land their first WebKit patch  so they wanted to make a statement that they weren't gettin

Please Stop the Abuse!

According to many of the tests on , jQuery is slow. Really slow. The jQuery team gets bug reports from web citizens who've discovered these egregious flaws via jsperf and want them fixed. Now, can be a great tool when used knowledgeably, but its results can also be misinterpreted and abused. For example: Why doesn't jQuery use DOM classList for methods like .addClass()? There are at least three good reasons. It doesn't make any practical performance difference given its frequency of use. It complicates code paths, since classList isn't supported everywhere. It makes jQuery bigger, which makes it load slower for everyone, every time. But this jsperf shows classList is much faster! How can you say that? Well it's possible that test is running afoul of microbenchmark issues , and not measuring what it is supposed to measure due to the increased sophistication of today's JavaScript compilers. This is a big problem with a lot of t

You Might Not Need Babel

Babel is great, and by all means use it if it makes it easier to develop your application. If you're developing a library on the other hand, please take a moment to consider whether you actually need Babel. Maybe you can write a few more lines of utility code and forego the need to pre-process. If you're only targeting some platforms, you may not need anything more than plain old ES6. At the very least, make sure you know what Babel is doing for you, and what it's not. Some developers believe that Babel is protecting us from a great demon of code complexity when, in truth, browsers and node are pretty easy to deal with on their own. Let's take a look at some of the strategies for not needing Babel. ES5 is pretty okay: In the days when we used tables for layout and the debugger was named alert() , we would have been so grateful if JavaScript had the features that ES5 has today. If you truly need Babel you are not only a weak programmer, but also an ingrate. Face