Critizising EXT JS documentation

[TheBerliner]

Hello authors of the EXT JS documentation,

there are many fundamental explanations missing in the API doc and I did not find them anywhere else. You are presuming the reader's knowledge of many terms the way you use them, which are nowhere explained. Please note that I have over 25 years of development experience, more than 20 in Smalltalk, so one really cannot call me a newbie (although my JS knowledge is limited.)

For example, these terms - just some few examples - are nowhere explained:

General:
Nothing said in general about the categories like properties etc.., are they accessible?

"Mixed" as a data type
This is certainly no industry standard term. Nothing mentioned f.e. on w3schools.com in conjunction with JavaScript.

"config options"
Very frequently used but nowhere explained. What is that? Something that you call "Object" in JavaScript? What class? Where/how created and set with values?

No whole tree structure visible
The most simple thing is missing: A view of the total tree of all classes! For me as an OOD veteran this is the first place to look at when trying to understand a class library.

No notation agenda
The notation that you are using is knowhere explained. That is a must for any documentation.

Definition of basic terms
F.e. what do you mean with "Property"? (not found as a general JS term either) Is that an instance variable or how do you use this term. Such things must be explained especially since these terms mean different things in different environments. Compare "class" in CSS (which has no real classes) versus Smalltalk or Java.

So over all: Your doc failed the "'s test" and you did not look at your work from the point of view of an EXT JS ousider who tries to understand the entire system. In my case, I am building an interface class library to EXT JS, so I must understand you library first.

The product looks excellent from the samples, but the documentation is very poor in my eyes. So please improve "your homework". Thank you.

Best regards

[Animal]

This is a Javascript question. Nothing to do with Ext's documentation.

"Mixed" data type
Means that several data types are accepted. Javascript is a weakly typed language. Any parameters may be passed.

Config options

"Something that you call an object" :)):))

There is an object data type which is a hash of properties (and this is a term in javascript)



var myObject = {
propName: "propValue"
};


That's "something that we call an object".

It's useful for passing named values into a constructor.

So it's useful for configuring complex classes.
Config options are explained in enormous detail where they are complex. eg, for the bodyCfg config option to Ext.Panel:

http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p286/TimeTrialAnimal/bodyCfg.jpg


Inheritance tree

It's there for each Class:

http://i131.photobucket.com/albums/p286/TimeTrialAnimal/hierarchy.jpg

"notation"
It's the language

Definition of terms
It's the language

"Failed the test"8-|8-|8-|

Idiots should not be writing web applications FFS!

The documentation is generally acknowledged to be some of the best out there.

You must learn to use it. It's is enormously comprehensive. Most of the source modules contain more documentation than code!

[Animal]

PS This topic became tiresome months ago. It comes up every tiome someone joins but refuses to learn the basics of the profession that they have chosen.

To be a web developer requires that you know DOM, CSS and Javascript.

People expect miracles for no input. Ain't going to happen. You still have to work to create software.

[cherbert]

Hello authors of the EXT JS documentation,

there are many fundamental explanations missing in the API doc and I did not find them anywhere else. You are presuming the reader's knowledge of many terms the way you use them, which are nowhere explained. Please note that I have over 25 years of development experience, more than 20 in Smalltalk, so one really cannot call me a newbie (although my JS knowledge is limited.)


I have over 25 years of development experience also and have found the Ext documentation some of the best I have ever seen or used. I have had no problems developing large scale real world applications using it.

As far as I am aware you are the first to raise an issue with them.

If you are expecting to write a Web Application and don't even have basic knowledge of fundamental web development languages like Javascript & JSON you arn't gonna get very far.

[Animal]

As far as I am aware you are the first to raise an issue with them.


Unfortunately, this thread just pops up every two or three months as someone new joins and expects to wave their arms around and get a beautiful working RIA.

[TheBerliner]

Well,

Your answers do not surprise me - but I do not consider them to be correct or justified.

Inheritance tree
Well, I am not blind. Of course, I have seen this but this is not a tree! It is just the single branch of the selected class. So I think it is obvious what I mean with an inheritance tree: The entire tree starting at object.

Examples: It is extremely laborious to detect all existing classes! Which I had to when creating an interface class tree for my environment. This and their structure is best visible from looking at Object. You seem to have overlooked that I have been using Smalltalk or you don't know what that is?

Something called an Object
Written by a >20 year Smalltalk veteran, this is more than justified, because this is probaly the most abused term in the entire industry. But you better don't step into an OOD discussion with a Smalltalk pioneer! It's never useful when the poult wants to teach the hen (in OO respects).

config options
I saw this list but I do not consider this to be a viable explanation for this feature in general.

Mixed
I understood that this could (probably) be of an arbitrary class. But two phrases of definition are needed. Especially, because EXT JS is used by people with very different language backgrounds. Right?! And this does not seem to be a general JS subject but rather your special term.

Miracles
An old German phrase is: Miracles take a bit longer, but whipping is available right now. Sorry, but your answer is just polemics. I was asking for what is considered standard in any technical documentation: A short explanation of the core terms used. Especially, if many of these terms are used with very different semantics (see "class").

And thank you for trying to explain to me how software is developed! Good that I learned this finally from you!

Best regards

[pmatsumura]

Something called an Object
Written by a >20 year Smalltalk veteran, this is more than justified, because this is probaly the most abused term in the entire industry. But you better don't step into an OOD discussion with a Smalltalk pioneer! It's never useful when the poult wants to teach the hen (in OO respects).Maybe you should go develop a Smalltalk application rather than a Javascript one then. What are you expecting? Javascript === Smalltalk? I don't think that will work.


To be a web developer requires that you know DOM, CSS and Javascript.There ya go. Thanks Animal



Something called an Object I have another question. Is Mouse = Mouse? Could one be an animal and the other a technical device?

Thanks,
Patrick

[TheBerliner]

Lot's of aggressive polemics her!

I hope you have gotten rid of your aggressions this way, at least!

Friendly and peaceful greetings!


P.S. FYI: Generating JavaScript code from a Smalltalk "engine" (large class library),which works at a very much higher abstraction level, works very nicely! Out of "real" objects. This same engine also generats HTML and acts as an Ajax server. With MVC logic, with all model and even most controller and view classes that can be re-used from desk-top for the web by the turn of a switch. And like this we do not have to fight with primitive file based editors (like in JavaScript) but we can profit from all the unmatched comfort of the Smalltalk development environment, that tells us immediately all senders, implementors etc.

[pmatsumura]

I'm not aggressive at all. I just figured that you are - as mentioned - a Smalltalk developer and not a Javascript developer. You keep showing of your experience and try to let Javascript look "stupid". And I don't quite understand why. Of course there are differences. Also does every language have its problems and weaknesses. But it doesn't help anybody - in a Javascript related forum - to pick on Javascript. Get the point?

[evant]

I think it would be useful to have some kind of introductory passage, for example:

General Object Construction and perhaps a brief explanation of some of the core concepts of how to use the docs.

Some, but not all of the points the OP has raised are quite valid, but some of them also seem to stem from an unfamiliarity with javascript in general.

[Animal]

The "API Home" tab has plenty of spare space.

There could be an overview there explaining the basics of config objects, constructors etc.

It's just a matter of the doc generator being modified to pull in an HTML file contributed and maintained by... someone.. the Ext core team, the doc volunteers?

[TheBerliner]

I think it would be useful to have some kind of introductory passage, for example:

General Object Construction and perhaps a brief explanation of some of the core concepts of how to use the docs. Some, but not all of the points the OP has raised are quite valid, but some of them also seem to stem from an unfamiliarty with javascript in general.

I fully agree - including your last phrase - and I admitted that in my original post ("although my JS knowledge is limited"). And I strongly suppose that I am not the only one relatively new to JS.

I think EXT JS offers a relatively easy way for "non-typical" web developers, who often have very solid experience in desk-top apps, to implement web apps quicker and easier. I myself still hate much of this stupid primitive HTML (not JS) and we are trying to keep as much of that to low level (Smalltalk) classes as possible.

See my P.S. above about how we generate JS and HTML.

Best regards

[alien3d]

Breliner. I know it's not comfortable as everyday if you deal with oop.Even with normal js ,i quite good but while in extjs, i sure dumb as you.Now i try my best to convert my extjs 1.0 to 3.0 .It's dam hard searching and understand but it's new technologies.Cannot run away from it,normal javascript dom is easy.



var x = new Ext.TabPanel({
// here they said config,in oop world can consider as constructor
height : x,
width : y,
// to add inheritance information
items : [ data1,data2,data3 ]
})
Or you might do like this as normal oop.Somebody correct it if below is wrong.
var x = new Ext.TabPanel({ });
x.height=numbers;
x.width =numbers;

[TheBerliner]

Well, Alien,

thank you very much for your efforts. So you think I should see "config" as a set method (set value to some instVar)? If it's as simple as that why DONT THEY EXPLAIN THEIR PRIVATE TERMS?!?!?! The word "config" really means something very different - and English is not my first language.

Never heard the word "config" being used for what is just as setter (value) method/function. This is what I have criticized: They use their own terms without explaining what they are supposed to mean!

It's probably the old disease of most professors: Never use anybody else's terms! If you don't invent your own, you're not respected!

I will try out in the next couple of days anyway when my OO interface lib is ready for testing.

Best regards

[wregen]

Hi Berliner, I am big fun of Ext since v0.4 (that is early 2007 as I remember), thus I have no (big) problems with understanding ExtDocs.

When people ask me where to start, my answer is: Ext Learning center :

http://extjs.com/learn

Thus, if your goal is to get the to know Ext, start from this articles:


http://extjs.com/learn/Tutorial:Introduction_to_Ext_2.0
http://extjs.com/learn/Ext_2_Overview
http://extjs.com/learn/Ext_1_to_2_Migration_Guide


With such a big experience with programming as yours, you will get all your answers very quickly.

[deanna]

Lot's of aggressive polemics her!

Generating JavaScript code from a Smalltalk "engine" (large class library),which works at a very much higher abstraction level, works very nicely! Out of "real" objects. This same engine also generats HTML and acts as an Ajax server. With MVC logic, with all model and even most controller and view classes that can be re-used from desk-top for the web by the turn of a switch. And like this we do not have to fight with primitive file based editors (like in JavaScript) but we can profit from all the unmatched comfort of the Smalltalk development environment, that tells us immediately all senders, implementors etc.

First, Javascript OO is not the OO of Smalltalk. Javascript is a different branch of OO referred to as Prototypical Objects. Don't expect it to be the exact same. Next there is an inheritance tree floating around on the forums. It is nice to see where things come from and helps understand what things are doing conceptually, but is not needed for development. But if your goal is to completely understand the library that will not be the way to go, you have to use it to understand it. If you are really wanting to apply the Smalltalk paradigm of development on javascript, look into Objective J http://cappuccino.org/ - they precompile a Smalltalk like language to javascript and have a Mac like API for the DOM.

On the config objects, this is kind of standard stuff in modern programing. I have seen it around since I first messed with the Win32 API. Instead of having a method with hundreds of parameters (most optional), you put the parameters into a config object and pass them that way. Next thing you have to understand is the prototypical object constructor, because that is how most of the config objects are used. There is a series of good videos of that on yahoo http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/theater/ . Javascript and the browser is a new paradigm to learn, you can't superimpose the Grady Booch style OO on it.

[alien3d]

Lets see for button click


var x = new Ext.button ({
id:'myButton'
height:100,
width:100
// the last line doesn't have comma.
});

// e.g 1
x.getItem('myButton').on('click/mouse over /mouse move // this they call public event',function () {
// if any event myButton happen as mouse over
alert('Hai you are over me');
});

function over_me() {
alert('hai you are over me');
}
x.getItem('myButton').on('click/mouse over /mouse move // this they call public event',over_me());

Above code might gave an idea how java script events work.

[entmike]

So you think I should see "config" as a set method (set value to some instVar)? If it's as simple as that why DONT THEY EXPLAIN THEIR PRIVATE TERMS?!?!?! The word "config" really means something very different - and English is not my first language.Perhaps you consider another platform if you can't take the time to read a few tutorials or learn how to interpret the API Documentation.

Animal, I'd agree a "How to use this API Documentation" would be helpful for new developers of ExtJS. But once you "get it", the API Documentation makes perfect sense. It just takes a bit of time to sink in the first few times how it was all laid out, but that doesn't really excuse people not making an effort to learn on their own.

[danh2000]

alien3d

why don't you test your code before posting it - that's the second crap example you've put in this thread that just won't work!

I know you are trying to be helpful but posting bad code isn't.

[TheBerliner]

Hello to Alabama,

a few quick comments:


First, Javascript OO is not the OO of Smalltalk.
Sure!
Javascript is a different branch of OO referred to as Prototypical Objects. Don't expect it to be the exact same.
I made clear that I never did!
Next there is an inheritance tree floating around on the forums. It is nice to see where things come from and helps understand what things are doing conceptually, but is not needed for development.
But for implementing a wrapper / interface library and that is was I am about.
But if your goal is to completely understand the library that will not be the way to go, you have to use it to understand it.
Of course, next step when testing the interface lib. As I wrote this had existed (in a primitive form) for EXT 1.1.
If you are really wanting to apply the Smalltalk paradigm of development on javascript, look into Objective J http://cappuccino.org/ -
I know this website. they precompile a Smalltalk like language
I know Objective-C - used it many years ago. Is a much better approach than C++. See Mac OS (= Next). to javascript and have a Mac like API for the DOM.

I am developing / improving something similar so that our objects don't have to mess around with JS code but can work at a much higher abstraction level. Works well for HTML already.


On the config objects, this is kind of standard stuff in modern programing.
Well, the term is quite exotic. Very little and no clear definition to find. The concept is very old, of course, it's standard procedure in our code, but why use private terms without explaining them!? That's my critics. The glossary is missing in the documentation (and some more).


Next thing you have to understand is the prototypical object constructor, because that is how most of the config objects are used. There is a series of good videos of that on yahoo http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/theater/ . Javascript and the browser is a new paradigm to learn, you can't superimpose the Grady Booch style OO on it.
Thank you for these links. Will most likely be helpful. Again: When using terms, it needs an explanation of how they are used in this context.

Best regards

[TheBerliner]

Perhaps you consider another platform if you can't take the time to read a few tutorials or learn how to interpret the API Documentation.

Animal, I'd agree a "How to use this API Documentation" would be helpful for new developers of ExtJS. But once you "get it", the API Documentation makes perfect sense. It just takes a bit of time to sink in the first few times how it was all laid out, but that doesn't really excuse people not making an effort to learn on their own.

Pardon, but this is all polemics! None of that is true!

Why don't you want to accept that:
- It's generally required to have a glossary for any documentation especially if rather private terms are used?! Don't blame the reader if that is missing!
- There is no good way to "sink into something" that is nowhere defined!
- Polemic allegations ("can't take the time to learn" - "not making an effort to learn") without any substance don't compensate missing doc!?

[TheBerliner]

Above code might gave an idea how java script events work.
Thank you! That is by no means new to me.

The subject of my post was a very different one.

[alien3d]

that the brenier point.If you do other programming language,it just code and it's work.Extjs is a javascript framework.We can do lot of code but still requirement of API like extdoc are fully not complete.Sometimes work and sometimes not.I just explaing how the consept work here ,either true of false it's diffirent matter.If you come from vb site,they love of win32 api listing and example while in php,the documentation is the best and all the example below the function.Extjs is keeping changing the docs and improving.=D>.
** brenier.are you wanted to automatic generated extjs code from smalltalk?Before i wanted to combine both and php as object and classes.It's difficult each time,you have to go to extdocs to find available `config` and available `event` for the item id or contentEl.

[TheBerliner]

** brenier.are you wanted to automatic generated extjs code from smalltalk?
Yes, as I explained in my post #8 further above, we have been doing this already on a simple scale (and for HTML/Ajax) and I am now writing a better wrapper/interface library for EXT 3.

PHP code is not yet generated but I am planning this for later this year in order to have this code produced from one central place. But we use PHP as little as possible. We already generate models including the DB DDL for PHP from Smalltalk. Coding was previously "hand made" but I consider such "conventional" (file based) PHP development to be quite a crap and want to get away from it.

[gerryw]

I can understand the OP's frustration to a certain degree. I have spent a lot of time reading the docs and looking at the examples. If I had to single out one thing that could be done to help newbies, it would be to refrain from using unamed objects in the examples. This an advanced language feature that I'm sure is very handy for those with experience, but it makes the code very hard to follow at first. Once I restructured a couple of the examples I was interested in, things became a lot clearer. It's an interesting feature, but like most things, it can be over done.

Thanks,
-G

[Animal]

I'm always interested in making the API docs better and easier to understand.

But I don't know what you mean by "refrain from using unamed objects"

[TheBerliner]

I'm always interested in making the API docs better and easier to understand.


Good to hear!

In this case, a Glossary would be a great first step. And I state that a Glossary is a "must" for every documentation that should be considered relatively good and complete!

Here is more that is missing (from last night) and that is completely unclear:

In capitals
What does it mean when a term in the methods section is spelled in capitals?
Like "Panel". Is that a factory method?
Or in Element Public Properties DISPLAY versus id? Just very bad style NOT to explain this anyewhere!
This use of syntax (capitals) must be explained somewhere.
Note that there are only four search results for "public properties" on your site in Google.

Class names
There are two variants used. For example:
Ext.grid.EditorGridPanel is the title but below it says:
class: EditorGRidPanel

Which one is correct? It says nowhere which term has to be used when creating an instance. I am writing a reference from our generation classes to the EXT classes so that instances of EXT classes are created automatically. Why one must be used? (Probably some namespace use here, but nothing explained. And this is definitely not pure JS, because it refers to calling the EXT lib)

xtype
This, too, is nowhere really explained. Seems that this is an EXT specific term. I found no other references in conjunction with JS. And then, what is an "xtype config"? Seems you are using your private terms without giving any definition. Very bad!

When searching in the API doc:
No results for "config object"
No results for "xtype" except where it is used
Enable wildcard searches in the doc (use some better presentation tool)

Whish list:
- a glossary explaining all terms
- a full inheritance tree from Object down
- an alphabetical view / list of all classes

Nota bene: Despite this being very critical, please try to see this as constructive proposal to improve the (currently very bad) quality of the EXT documentation.

[Animal]

Panel.

Is it a method?

You are an expert man.

You know exactly what Panel is.

[Animal]

xtype ?

FULL explanation:

http://extjs.com/deploy/dev/docs/?class=Ext.Component

[Animal]

Class names?

It is common to omit the namespace in which a class exists.

In Java , you commonly use "String", not "java.lang.String".

[Animal]

Glossary for javascript terminology? Google. I found plenty.

Here's one: http://www.help4web.net/webmaster/Java/NewJS/JavaScriptIdiotsGuide/glossary.html

[TheBerliner]

Panel.

Is it a method?

You are an expert man.

You know exactly what Panel is.

First of all, it would be very helpful if you were trying to suppress you cynics. They don't serve anybody except perhaps your own satisfaction

I wrote in my very first post that I am relatively new to JavaScript and I made clear that I am writing/improving a wrapper to prevent us from coding (more than necessary) in JS so that we can call EXT from our environment.

In my view (after >20 yrs Smalltalk) it makes no sense to list a "public method" named "Panel" in a list of methods and properties (<- nowhere explained what that is) of class Panel. Either it's the class (most defintely) or a method but:
a) why with the same name in public methods
b) why spelled with a capital "P"

I must regard this as unclear and inconsistent documentation. The same exists elsewhere as listed above (in class Element). I have no clue what method "Panel" does in class "Panel". This is simply illogical!

[TheBerliner]

Glossary for javascript terminology? Google. I found plenty.

Here's one: http://www.help4web.net/webmaster/Java/NewJS/JavaScriptIdiotsGuide/glossary.html
Oh, come on, don't waste your and my time on such nuisance!

If you read (and understand) my posts, you will see that I clearly asked for a Glossary of the EXT doc and the EXT specific use of terms!

[Animal]

I have no clue what method "Panel" does in class "Panel". This is simply illogical!

It's a constructor!

The class name is the constructor name.

This is normal OO.

[Animal]

Class names are capitalized.

This too is normal OO.

[TheBerliner]

xtype ?

FULL explanation:

http://extjs.com/deploy/dev/docs/?class=Ext.Component
One phrase, which essentially refers to itself - this is not what I call an explanation.

It says there: "Every component has a specific xtype, which is its Ext-specific type name, along with methods for checking the xtype like getXType (http://extjs.com/forum/../deploy/dev/docs/output/Ext.Component.html#Ext.Component-getXType) and isXType (http://extjs.com/forum/../deploy/dev/docs/output/Ext.Component.html#Ext.Component-isXType). This is the list of all valid xtypes:"

I read that long ago - but not being a JS expert it raised more questions than it answered. Especially, since there is not one example how they are used (in this section). Should all be part of a Glossary.

It says "type name". Do they mean "data type" in the sense of basic classes (like String, Number etc)?

[TheBerliner]

It's a constructor!

The class name is the constructor name.

This is normal OO.
Wrong. The most frequently used constructor (factory) method is "new". Maybe you cooked your own "oo"?

[evant]

Some of the most widely used OO languages (Java, C#, C++) all use the class name as the constructor. I would say that's probably grounds to say that it's common ;)

Anyway, this is getting wildly off topic, let's stop bothering with semantics and have some useful discussion on how the documentation can be improved.

[danh2000]

Wrong. The most frequently used constructor (factory) method is "new". Maybe you cooked your own "oo"?

There was nothing wrong about that statement - Panel is the constructor!

If you already think you know the answers, why ask?

You're not being particularly constructive here - you started by highlighting some valid and probably helpful additions to the doc center. If you want to contribute, make some more valid suggestions - even write the missing pieces yourself and present them for inclusion, but blindly criticizing within an environment that you are new to isn't helping anyone is it?

If you are struggling with JavaScript and Ext, tell the team what could have helped you understand better - they are all for improving the docs and learning center - you will find people more receptive if you stop throwing stones.

[TheBerliner]

Some of the most widely used OO languages (Java, C#, C++) all use the class name as the constructor. I would say that's probably grounds to say that it's common ;)

Well, I was the project manager of one Objective-C project in the 80ies with about 80 men years and one in C++ in the early 90-ies of about 20 mean years.

We always sent "new" to the class to create an instance. And no class ever had a method with the same name as the class (and this is what is listed in your docs).

P.S. Both projects succeeded!

[TheBerliner]

If you want to contribute, make some more valid suggestions - even write the missing pieces yourself and present them for inclusion, but blindly criticizing within an environment that you are new to isn't helping anyone is it?
I consider my (2nd) list above exactly that. But you (plural) prefer to pick out those subjects, which are more JS related, in order to forget about the others, which are purely related to EXT.

But I think it's better to end this discussion from my side at this point. It seems to be a waste of time.

We have the classical situation:
- Somebody tells the authors what they missed (Glossary etc) and where they were not precise.
- The authors do not explicitly deny this but prefer to raise those points where they have some arguments (like in politics).
- And the authors don't agree - for heaven's sake - that there could be anything to improve in their writing.
- Instead, they tell the reader implicitly that he is too stupid and/or does not meet the preconditions to understand what is written.

Therefore, I see no sense in continuing this and trying to tell you were your docs are inconsistent and/or unclear, because in any case you always and definitely think to know it better!

The (very powerful) German language has a brilliant word for this state: "beratungsresistent". The translation is something like "resistant to advice" but this is not a one-to-one translation. It's not the first time I am encountering this - and the day that my customers tell me (or my team) to be like that, I will retire!

Adios!

[danh2000]

The (very powerful) German language has a brilliant word for this state: "beratungsresistent". The translation is something like "resistant to advice" but this is not a one-to-one translation.

In my opinion, your approach was wrong - in your very first post you quote your lengthy experience and instantly criticize with negative statements such as:



So please improve "your homework"


How do you expect people to react?

[evant]

Really? You used C++ for 20 years and you never saw a method with the same name as a class name?

http://www.cplusplus.com/doc/tutorial/classes/



This constructor function must have the same name as the class, and cannot have any return type; not even void.


Once again, great that your projects with Obj-C succeeded, it's not what we're talking about here. Lets get this back on track, or we'll just lock the thread.

[TheBerliner]

How do you expect people to react?
No, I stated that I was new to JavaScript - but not a newbie in general.

I was not expecting people to be so sensitive! And documentation with a glossary is - to use another term - the basics (i.e. homework) for any product and for a sophisticated library in particular (I even called the product brilliant).

[TheBerliner]

Really? You used C++ for 20 years and you never saw a method with the same name as a class name
Fortunately only for 5-6 years and as project manager (not coding), because I consider C++ to be great s...t which is filtered by this forum software.


Really? You used C++ for 20 years and you never saw a method with the same name as a class name
You are using imprecise language: The class is the receiver of "new", i.e. new is sent to the class and there is (generally) no method with the name of the class - and this is exactly what is listed in you docs (see above).

So in sending: myClass new, the "myClass" is not a method. But in your list of methods there is one with the name of that class (which would be technically possible). So I was asking what that means and why it's spelled differently (no comment on that till now).

But again, your reaction proves me right (unfortunately): all you are trying is to tell the reader that he is stupid/wrong/missing requirements (where you are having a hard stand in my case) instead of being a tiny little bit self-critical.

Again: I am out of this! You are most resistant to advice! Good luck!



P.S. I looked up the link. We had abstraction layers when building instances where instVars were generated from data and 98% were in Dicts anyway (fully dynamic). So we hardly ever used this form of initialize directly - and yes - I was not aware that this exists in C++ and that it mus have the same name as the class. In your doc it just says Panel ( Object config ), nothing about constructor.

[tjstuart]

Well, I was the project manager of one Objective-C project in the 80ies with about 80 men years and one in C++ in the early 90-ies of about 20 mean years.

...

P.S. Both projects succeeded!

Good lord man! Do you think anybody actually gives a toss?. You are carrying on like a child. I've encountered many a tool in my time but you sir take the cake.

[pmatsumura]

I suggest that this thread should be closed since it doesn't help anybody.

[alien3d]

This year is 2009,extjs have introduce a lot of thing in js inviroment.I start using extjs when they started 0.33 yui-ext.I started develop code using 0.33 .Then moved to 1.0 extjs.The responce i got for this UI is very good(idcms inventory at sourceforge).Email response love Extjs interface =D>

Php is a good language and tried also to be others language.So don't critize what you cannot manipulate.Even though not fully oop as smalltalk or others language.It's still the best to me rather then other language in used(asp,coldfusion,java and etc).

To stick the best,what you can really manipulate with this Extjs rather then arguing what suppose to be.If you got idea to improved the doc,contribute to them examples on smalltalk to extjs for example :-/.

[gerryw]

Hi,

I am new to both ExtJS and JavaScript, so I feel like we are in a similar situation. I have also been a C/C++ developer for many years.

1. I have absolutely no idea what C/C++ has to do with ExtJS or JavaScript.
2. I have had absolutely no problem with the documentation. I actually think it's great.
3. I have found that having a JavaScript reference handy makes things much easier.
4. I can't begin to imagine how I would critique the documentation before I have a reasonable understanding of the JavaScript language itself.
5. I am very impressed by the patience of the folks on this forum. I feel like I've made the right choice with ExtJS.

Oh Yeah,
-G

[VinylFox]

@TheBerliner

Something that might get you over this hump is sitting next to the fireplace with a hot cup of coco and a good book to read. Im picturing a nice ski lodge...oh yeah!

I would suggest the one in my signature - the book that is, not the ski lodge.

[jay@moduscreate.com]

Idiots should not be writing web applications FFS!



Can i frame this? ~o)

[jay@moduscreate.com]

@TheBerliner

Something that might get you over this hump is sitting next to the fireplace with a hot cup of coco and a good book to read. Im picturing a nice ski lodge...oh yeah!

I would suggest the one in my signature - the book that is, not the ski lodge.

+1 Learning Ext JS is an excellent resource to get your feet wet with the framework. I own a copy myself.

[mjlecomte]

Let's try to keep this constructive shall we? I'm not sure if I missed anything, but I gather this is a summary of the high points requested.



Whish list:
- a glossary explaining all terms
- a full inheritance tree from Object down
- an alphabetical view / list of all classes

Nota bene: Despite this being very critical, please try to see this as constructive proposal to improve the (currently very bad) quality of the EXT documentation.

Glossary. Maybe you can open a new thread entitled "[DOCS] - Glossary". In that thread you can espouse the items to be included in a Glossary.

Tree. I think that's already there as Animal pointed out in one post. It doesn't show "Object" but it does show after that. A full schema showing all classes together has been posted a few times in the forums.

List. Isn't that just the West region of the API Docs?




xtype
This, too, is nowhere really explained. Seems that this is an EXT specific term. I found no other references in conjunction with JS. And then, what is an "xtype config"? Seems you are using your private terms without giving any definition. Very bad!

It's not really explained in the API Docs, but there is an entry in the wiki about it:
http://extjs.com/learn/Tutorial:Xtype_defined

The notion of xtype has evolved a bit.

Some people have complained some docs are too bloated even. I'd have to think more about how this particular one could be improved.



Enable wildcard searches in the doc (use some better presentation tool)

The search utility in the docs is not up to date (it currently references circa Ext JS 2.0).

[saJoshua]

I suggest that this thread should be closed since it doesn't help anybody.

+1

[TheBerliner]

Let's try to keep this constructive shall we?
I have responded to this in a long PM - avoiding the herd's polemics!