jQuery or Mootools?

DOMAssistant ;-) Seriously, though, it’s pretty much impossible to answer your question unless you tell us more. Specifically, what is/are your use case(s)? What are you trying to do that you want a JavaScript library to help you with? What do you value in a library (e.g., comprehensiveness? smallest possible download? ease of use?)?

Tough question. I agree with DOMAssistant. Depends on the purpose and your priorities. Both of them have nice comprehensive tutorials so whichever you chose, you can jump start at once.

BTW, I’ve mostly used Prototype, partly because it’s included with Symfony, the PHP framework with which we develop at work. Yes, it has its weaknesses (especially the download size), but it’s pretty comprehensive and helpful. I’ve only briefly looked at jQuery (and appreciated their approach) and haven’t used Mootools (though they have a confidence-inspiring website). Another player out there is Fork JavaScript.

Again, it just depends on what you value in a library. I just found DOMAssistant today, but after reading a little about it, I was saying to myself, “That’s the way I would do it if I were to write a JavaScript framework!” It’s got full support for both CSS3 selectors and XPath expressions. That alone is a big plus in my book.

Yup, all depends on what you’re looking for. If you want pure flat-out speed, check out the benchmarking sites out there that have run the tests (or, try them yourself).

If you’re looking for good tools libraries, each of them (Prototype, jQuery, Mootools) allow you to have pretty decent cross-browser access to whatever DOM element, event, or AJAX request you could think of.

I only really have experience using Prototype coupled with script.aculo.us to do most of my JavaScript work and animations, and thus far it has been amazing… though I have heard some really good things about both jQuery and Mootools.

I will throw a nod out there for jQuery, although your mileage may vary. I think jQuery is much more mature and is really being adopted by the development community.

Again though, in the end, it really depends on your needs. jQuery may be overkill for what you want to do.

@AreaOne, jQuery is more mature than what, Mootools? Could be. Prototype, though, is a very mature library. You’re right that these big libraries may be overkill (which is another reason for considering DOMAssistant), but there are benefits in terms of development time that are gained by consistently using the same library.

I mentioned above that I use Prototype for most things. I’m actually not a Scriptaculous man, though, preferring Animator for whizzy effects (like the calendar animations on this site I helped build).

oh man, it seems I need to get more in depth to the project and then find my own conclusions, for which one to go. Thanks for your opinions and giving some other libraries names. This project is getting exciting. Thanks again.

I just hope you don’t get lost. There are a lot of good jscript libraries out there. All the best ;)

I used Prototype for a while and recently moved to a job where jQuery was the preferred standard.

After using it for a little while, I think I’ll use jQuery for any future projects where I have a choice.

@rictic, I’ve wanted to get into jQuery, but haven’t had to so I haven’t round the time. What did you like about it? Anything you wish it did that Prototype (or some other lib) does?

@segdeha jquery makes unobtrusive javascript very easy. Everything I wanted to do in the project was simple and elegant. The method chaining is very convenient when you get the hang of it, and doesn’t get in the way while you’re learning.

Of course, the last time I used prototype was a couple years ago, so perhaps it’s worth another look.

I’d recommend jQuery for its shallow learning curve and extensibility. I use it in just about every web project and work with it every day, and it continually impresses me with its power and simplicity.