Comments on: MooTools 1.2 Beta 2 Released, Adds New Element Storage

By: jdempcy

jdempcy — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 20:03:26 +0000

Now that its out of Beta, check out the final changes including a much-improved (imo) API and more features than you can shake a stick at:

http://www.thetruetribe.com/2008/06/whats-new-in-mootools-12.php

By: hydrian

hydrian — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 22:21:53 +0000

Mootools 1.2 is backwards compatible, you just have to enable the 1.1 compat libraries when you download 1.2b[1-2].

By: jurio

jurio — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 23:56:13 +0000

pootools

By: Aaron N.

Aaron N. — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 21:58:36 +0000

Viktor, csuwldcat, why don’t you two take that attitude somewhere else?

By: cdude

cdude — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 15:59:04 +0000

What’s so exciting about this Element Storage feature? Doesn’t everyone know this already? This can’t be the highlight of the release. I got nothing against the cow people but they need to step it up. Every time they release something I get the feeling I’ve seen it in another framework a week earlier.

By: csuwldcat

csuwldcat — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 14:27:29 +0000

Viktor – mootrolls? Ohhh, you must be one of those jQueers. Stop dissing on a frame work that is trying to evolve Javascript to do new and exciting things instead of just piecemeal-addons to its status quo. Lame a$$.

By: Viktor Kojouharov

Viktor Kojouharov — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:07:00 +0000

the mootrolls are surprisingly missing from this thread. it doesn’t have that distinct ‘OMG you didn’t mention mootools!!!111″ type of comments :)

By: 800px

800px — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 09:38:06 +0000

I am currently re-writing our CMS api and Mootools has always been our base. Since the beta 1 release we decided to use that version and have been using it’s new features as much as possible; Our favorites are the object method inheritance and the element storage.

because element storage is linked in with mootools garbage you have to make sure you destroy() every element you reference in your scripts but boy does memory stay low in all the browsers.

By: starkraving

starkraving — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 04:55:01 +0000

Apparently they haven’t made it fully backwards compatible with 1.11 either. There is however another link you can run that will patch it. Why they didn’t make the patched version the actual beta I don’t know. I’m having trouble in Firefox with $(elements) losing their events. I guess I’ll have to download this new patched version and see if it resolves this.

By: farinspace

farinspace — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 03:20:03 +0000

It seems like there are several changes with the core framework, doesn’t look like a simple upgrade from 1.11 to 1.2 …

By: Charles

Charles — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 20:00:16 +0000

put/get is like half the bytes as well! I much prefer $.data anyway. Also, if you’re not chaining, in what order are ‘Element Accessors’ processed? Is there a speed advantage to not chaining?
.
No namespacing, native objects are further extended, and the methods are verbose — but very explanatory. I’d rather have overloaded methods and clean native objects.
.
Yet again I understand what the MooTools library is doing, I don’t understand why, and I can’t seem to find the reasons, either. To each their own, I guess! Go MooTools.

By: Andy Kant

Andy Kant — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 17:05:45 +0000

Congrats on the new release and thanks for the new docs. I’d prefer the old-fashioned put/get to store/retrieve for Element.Storage but thats just semantics.