<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why to use JavaScript and Ajax toolkits?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://anaykamat.com/2007/08/19/why-to-use-javascript-and-ajax-toolkits/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://anaykamat.com/2007/08/19/why-to-use-javascript-and-ajax-toolkits/</link>
	<description>Technology, Programming, Career, Fun, Friends And Thoughts</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Nov 2010 06:43:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nigel Fernandes</title>
		<link>http://anaykamat.com/2007/08/19/why-to-use-javascript-and-ajax-toolkits/comment-page-1/#comment-60</link>
		<dc:creator>Nigel Fernandes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2007 19:39:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://anaykamat.com/2007/08/19/why-to-use-javascript-and-ajax-toolkits/#comment-60</guid>
		<description>You say in your post:
&quot;However, JavaScript lacks modularity and thus makes it difficult to use it for large and complex application.&quot;

How and on what basis do you make this claim? Being a functional programming language, I strongly disagree JavaScript is not modular. 

Further more you go on to say a few lines below, that the toolkits provide you with re-usable components and support for unit testing. This a blatant contradiction of you own previous statement about JavaScript modularity since the toolkits are written in JavaScript themselves.

I do agree and see in value in JS libraries, but my reasons are just a little different.

cheers.
Nigel
http://tech.nigel.in</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You say in your post:<br />
&#8220;However, JavaScript lacks modularity and thus makes it difficult to use it for large and complex application.&#8221;</p>
<p>How and on what basis do you make this claim? Being a functional programming language, I strongly disagree JavaScript is not modular. </p>
<p>Further more you go on to say a few lines below, that the toolkits provide you with re-usable components and support for unit testing. This a blatant contradiction of you own previous statement about JavaScript modularity since the toolkits are written in JavaScript themselves.</p>
<p>I do agree and see in value in JS libraries, but my reasons are just a little different.</p>
<p>cheers.<br />
Nigel<br />
<a href="http://tech.nigel.in" rel="nofollow">http://tech.nigel.in</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

