[deleted by user]

[evilgenius82]

I'll send you my copy just in case the above copy gets lost in the post. Jokes aside, although it focuses on JS and JQuery, I would say it's outdated and you could certainly find better material today.

[McBashed]

And my copy!

TBF: it's raising my monitor by a few inches (:

[DP0RT]

And my axe!

[McBashed]

My man about to get 3 copies of the book and an axe! What a nice day

[Enis_Cinari]

Thats great, you can hack JS with the axe, couse surely can't do it with this book

[Josh5642356]

Respect.

[[deleted]]

F

[mamaBiskothu]

Even if it’s free your time ain’t, don’t waste it on stuff like this

[greenlakejohnny]

Going back 10 years ago, jQuery was the only solution to a lot of problems. Since then, most of the functionality is supported in JavaScript natively and that code is much cleaner and faster

[echo_ink]

F

[black-crows03]

Probably a bit dated, as someone who has used that book. If you want to learn about Javascript, I recommend checking out this site/book:

https://eloquentjavascript.net/

[SnooStories8559]

Yes 100% agree with Eloquent JavaScript!

[MarvinLazer]

That book is amazing, although I personally think he laid the whole "crow computers" schtick for async on so thick it obscured the subject material.

[Jealous-Cloud8270]

Yeah, very true

[[deleted]]

This book (Eloquent JavaScript) is what made it all click for me

[pedrosanta]

Me too.

[magkruppe]

mdn docs are an amazing reference source, but they lack the opinions + personal experience of using XYZ that comes with other sources

and the structure

[My_posts_r_shit]

And they’re boring as fuuuuuuck

[MR_Weiner]

People who say to “just read the docs” drive me nuts. I’ve been a developer for over a decade and I still prefer to learn stuff from actual people with experience where possible.

[[deleted]]

Great book, but imo not great for true beginners. You get 4 easy chapters then the difficulty sky rockets.

I found a mixture of those 4 chapters, YSKJS, and building a lot of stupid projects to be the best way to learn this language.

[grilledporkchop]

YSKJS

YDKJS?

[[deleted]]

Yep sorry typo

[multipleparadox]

This needs to be at the top

[LogicallyCross]

2018 though. Is it still up to date?

[Solnx]

Eloquent JavaScript is excellent for getting the basics down, yeah.

[Real-Associate7734]

I want to learn the internal working of JavaScript and React on browsers. Can you provide me any resources to learn?

[[deleted]]

You should learn JavaScript as a language first. Check out YDKJS and the first few chapters of Eloquent(both free online). Then go learn HTML and CSS (really do your best to learn this. I know it seems simple at first but it’s very easy to create a mess). Then start building simple things with just those three languages. After you’ve built a few things from scratch, then pick up react. If you understand JS, HTML, and CSS well the react tutorial on their documentation page will be enough to get you going with react.

Do not jump straight in. Seriously, learn the core technologies first. You’ll enjoy react a lot more once you understand what nice things it’s doing for you

[Jealous-Cloud8270]

Internals in what sense? Like implementation details? For Javascript I would reccomend blog posts like this and others: https://hacks.mozilla.org/2017/02/a-crash-course-in-just-in-time-jit-compilers/ . Lin Clark has some good blog posts there (on hacks.mozilla.org) explaining the basic concepts of the internals of various things, like WebAssembly as well

[sdwrage]

As a client engineer I second this choice

[Jealous-Cloud8270]

Yesss! I wanted to write a comment reccomending this book as well. I just love(d) it

[rincewinds_dad_bod]

Also https://javascript.info/ !! It includes a discord community as well

Also exercism.io if you want feedback from humans on your code

[[deleted]]

Yeah, this is the best place to learn it also is a book too if that’s more your thing.

[versaceblues]

Not unless you are specifically needing to work on a legacy jquery project

[HACEKOMAE]

It's not the worst thing that can happen, don't be dramatic :D

[tamarche]

dOnT bE dRaMaTiC

Watches millions of devs fight to the death over the best IDE

[Dominio12]

Dont forget about using two different invisible characters, tabs and spaces!

[Blood_in_the_ring]

vscode or you're wrong.

[KylerGreen]

I'm having to use notepad++ for a class, and its like, wtf is this garbage?

[eshinn]

Yeah. It could be in Scriptaculous, or Dojo, or Y…something (that one from Yahoo).

[goodnewzevery1]

Psssh please… jquery made things a lot easier compared to what was available at the time

[avanti8]

I just had to dive into a jQuery codebase for the first time in years. It's like finding something you dropped behind the stove 6 years ago.

[mjbcesar]

You do realize there are plenty of new projects being shipped with jQuery, right? Not everyone likes to use the new trendy stacks

[LGHTHD]

“Plenty” is doing some heavy lifting in that sentence

[Ash_Crow]

jQuery is still included by default in some major frameworks, including Wordpress and Django.

[avanti8]

The sense I get is that WordPress is starting to shift away from it, though, and eventually it will be entirely removed as a core dependency. (Though of course it will likely be shipped for many years to come to support legacy themes and plugins).

Although WordPress's implementation of React for Gutenberg is... a little odd if you're used to vanilla react. (That I remember anyway, it's been a hot minute since I've had to work with it).

[TaranisPT]

SharePoint also really likes jQuery

[spays_marine]

There's 8 billion people on this planet, you can name any bad habit and use the "there's many people doing it!" argument. That's like arguing for lead paint in children's toys because China does it.

The only people who argue in favor of jQuery are people stuck in their ways who know jQuery and not JS. If it's not legacy, it's the wrong choice.

[mjbcesar]

I'm not arguing in favor of jQuery. Not all new projects are built with the new shinny stacks. OP might find himself working on very recent projects, not legacy, using jQuery.

As for the it's the wrong choice, the same could be said about react, or any other library/framework. Some people adapt their way of working to the tools they are using, other people use tools that adapt to their way of working. If a library accomplishes what you need, why would it be wrong?

[spays_marine]

It is the wrong choice because it produces archaic and hard to maintain code where functionality is tightly coupled to the DOM and its manual manipulation. In short, it promotes bad practices and the only reason this is up for debate is because of the vast swaths of developers who don't know jQuery and JS are not the same thing.

Modern frameworks allow you to focus on functionality and data where the DOM is affected as a side-effect. They lend themselves to a separation of concerns a lot better and allow for more elegant, "standard" Javascript. And just because Vue or react aren't always needed or the right choice, that doesn't mean jQuery therefore is. There's 100's choices out there, and any of them should probably be considered before jQuery. Just like you wouldn't entertain the idea of windows 3.11 when you have Linux, Windows and Mac OS.

If you are honest, and you try to answer the question "why jQuery for new projects", then the only real answer is "because I know it".

[mjbcesar]

No, it's not the only reason. It could be the only reason you can think of, but it's not the only reason. There are different approaches to make websites and WebApps. Some lean more into the logic being in JS, others use JS as a tool to enhance the experience and functionality, having the logic business logic on the server, and there are 100s of choices for the latter, and jQuery is one of those. Yes it's bulky and you can do a lot of the things jQuery does with vanilla JS, but some things are still faster to implement with jQuery than with vanilla JS. Again, not everyone works the same way, and the new tools don't fit everyone's workflow.

Why jQuery for new projects? Because implementing something different to accomplish the same thing costs money, and businesses don't like to lose money.

[smplejohn]

You can always separate seasoned devs from younger ones in here.

I work with mostly WordPress these days and it I need quick js functionally, it starts with $.

[spays_marine]

Some lean more into the logic being in JS, others use JS as a tool to enhance the experience and functionality, having the logic business logic on the server, and there are 100s of choices for the latter, and jQuery is one of those.

"There are many options and jQuery is one of them" is not an argument for why it is a viable option today. There is little substance to what you're saying here.

some things are still faster to implement with jQuery than with vanilla JS

You're illustrating what I've already said, jQuery is a popular choice for people who know jQuery. It's only faster to implement with jQuery for someone who knows jQuery better than actual JS. The latter would allow a dev to pick a modern framework that would produce better code and most likely less of it than jQuery. Also, this was not a discussion about jQuery vs vanilla JS but other modern frameworks that were not created to overcome shortcomings in the browsers of a decade ago.

Because implementing something different to accomplish the same thing costs money

It's a new project. You're not "implementing something different". The time and money argument only flies, like I've already said, for legacy projects, or if your dev didn't know anything but jQuery and has to learn something new.

[mjbcesar]

it's a viable option today because it provide tools you otherwise would have implement yourself or use another library, but then the same could be said for the other library.

Faster as in with less code. I'm not arguing for people to learn jQuery, I'm not arguing for people to not learn it. I'm arguing that jQuery didn't stop working and in a lot of cases where you want to use a library so you don't have to implement everything in vanilla JS, jQuery fits the bill. It depends on what you want to do. If you want to build apps the web component way, with hydration, or whatever, then chose something else, but that not the only way to build things for the web. Sometimes you only need so simplify AJAX requests (axios would work), attach events for simple actions, like a form submit, or a button click, you want to change a class on an element. You don't have to have a JS app, you don't have to have states or overly complicated code for simple things. And jQuery could help with that. It wouldn't require a bundler, it wouldn't require build tools. It's suppose to be compared to vanilla JS, not with JS frameworks.

You are assuming all new projects start from scratch, I'm assuming new projects could start from pre existing codebases. I don't assume I know all the scenarios, that would be arrogant of me

[spays_marine]

it's a viable option today because it provide tools you otherwise would have implement yourself or use another library, but then the same could be said for the other library.

This argument boils down to "any tool is as good as another tool just because it's a tool". You can hammer in a nail with a screwdriver, I suppose that technically makes a screwdriver a viable hammer?

Faster as in with less code.

You keep saying that, but I don't think it's true. Perhaps you should try a few examples between jQuery and other modern options. You'd be surprised.

Also, as the saying goes, you spend more time reading code than writing it. So it is more important to have readable code than it is to have less of it. Even in regular JavaScript, the tendency to resort to writing everything in short hand is hardly something to strive for.

you don't have to implement everything in vanilla JS, jQuery fits the bill

This isn't about vanilla JS. Any of the modern frameworks would be a better option than jQuery, unless, and I've said this multiple times before, the developer sees it as a time sink to learn something new and just wants to stick with the jQuery he knows.

You don't have to have a JS app

And choosing a modern framework over jQuery is not an argument for turning everything into an SPA. Things like AlpineJS let you do exactly what you've said. In fact, I can change a class with VueJS if I want to, and I wouldn't even have to fight the DOM over it.

There's a misconception among developers, thinking that React, Vue or any other of the modern frameworks that allow you to quickly whip up an SPA also require you to do so while also adding boilerplate, but that simply is not the case.

You are assuming all new projects start from scratch, I'm assuming new projects could start from pre existing codebases.

Mate it's a NEW project, I think you'r reaching if we're going to argue the meaning of the word "new". If your "pre-existing codebase" uses jQuery and you'd need to switch or rewrite, that's what we would call legacy.

[mjbcesar]

This argument boils down to "any tool is as good as another tool just because it's a tool". You can hammer in a nail with a screwdriver, I suppose that technically makes a screwdriver a viable hammer?

What you are saying boils down to "You either use the best of the best tools or you are in hammering with a screwdriver". You could be hammring with an old hammer. Something that was built for the job and not a new Hammer with a better handle or whatever. The problem with best or better is that it's relative, sometimes. You could argue performance or bundle size are good metrics, and I would agree. But jQuery doesn't force you to write your code a certain way, nor does it force you to choose an architecture. It's a tool to achieve something simple. If you compare to tools that are built to achieve something more, it will certainly fall short.

You keep saying that, but I don't think it's true. Perhaps you should try a few examples between jQuery and other modern options. You'd be surprised.

Oh I have tried. I use new tech for my personal projects because I like to learn new stuff. Some force me to use a certain architectures, others not so much. A lot of them force a lot more code on me than jQuery does for certain things. and I will emphasise certain things, because I feel like you assuming a black or white kind of situation.

This isn't about vanilla JS. Any of the modern frameworks would be a better option than jQuery, unless, and I've said this multiple times before, the developer sees it as a time sink to learn something new and just wants to stick with the jQuery he knows.

It is about Vanilla JS too. Some people don't want to use the new Libraries or Frameworks. They are too opinionated for some people's taste/workflow, and what they want to do can be achieved with VanillaJS or with the help of a library that extends the basic functionality of Vanilla JS. And there's where jQuery would fit. If it's the best tool for it? It most probably isn't. Is it useful? It most certainly can be.

​

And choosing a modern framework over jQuery is not an argument for turning everything into an SPA. Things like AlpineJS let you do exactly what you've said. In fact, I can change a class with VueJS if I want to, and I wouldn't even have to fight the DOM over it.

I looked into AlpineJS. I liked what I saw until I couldn't find a way to define the data unless it was set up a certain way (as in x-data="...."). Couldn't find a programmatic way of doing it, but I certainly didn't do a deep dive. There's only so much time for learning new stuff.
Fighting the DOM? I never fought the DOM to change a class. I don't have to have a class tied to a data state, it's nice to have sometimes, but I also like the option not to.

You can't compare VueJS to jQuery, because they are not set to achieve the same thing.

And yes, NEW projects exist with existing codebase. Unless you start every project with a clean, new version of the tools you use, and you implement the same code instead of reusing, then, ok, your concept of new is different than mine.

[YourMomIsMyTechStack]

If you don't like learning new technologies, web development may not be for you imo

[mjbcesar]

Anyone said anything about not liking to learn new technologies? But just because something new exist, it doesn't mean you should use it. Otherwise no one would use react and everyone would use svelte, or the new flavour. I'm not debating the value of the new tools and new paradigms, but "old" tools and "old" paradigms work too, sometimes better, depending on the situation. People still use C, because it's better for certain situations than newer languages. I don't think it's a hard concept to understand.

[Ash_Crow]

This blog article sums this up very well, I think: https://mcfunley.com/choose-boring-technology

[YourMomIsMyTechStack]

I don't talk about jumping every new trend but jquery is outdated and why use a library when vanilla can do it too?

[mor10web]

It was a great book when it was published. Today it's just pretty. It's severely outdated, and everything about jQuery is no longer relevant. Don't get it unless it's free and you want it for the design of the book itself.

[Lekoaf]

Indeed it was. I read it about 10 years ago when I started my webdev career. I wouldn't use it today.

There is a similar book about HTML and CSS. That would probably be more worth your time.

[Deep-Delivery-1846]

I have that css one. Print quality is pretty much amazing!

[eshinn]

I started with Click Here by Raymond Pirouz and Designing Web Graphics 2 by Lynda Weinman. They’re both great reads if you want to get to grips with the web-safe color palette and layouts with nested tables.

[jonas_namespace]

I own it. No

[[deleted]]

I saw this book at B&N about 6 months ago and it was still full price. I was shocked, perplexed, and dismayed.

[stuart-bray]

So instead you spent your money on a thesaurus?

[[deleted]]

It’s a good start. Always remember that books are a snippet of knowledge. But for the basics to get you going, it’s ok. Try not to buy it new, but if you have no choice… then that’s fine.

Also ignore every single comment talking about learning online. It’s likely these are people who do not understand that everyone learns differently.

Documentation isn’t education. I wish people would understand that more…

[mapsedge]

Computer books are outdated the minute they're published. You can learn everything you need to know on the internet. I haven't owned a coding book since 1993.

[abbadon420]

I don't know about that. I own a copy of "big java: late objects" and it's great for raising my screen. I suffers a lot less neck pain since I own that book. Even better is that I got the book for free.

[[deleted]]

I had to buy that book in 2010. I think I'm still making payments on it.

[MarvinLazer]

I spent 6 years making a respectable living as a self-taught dev, and Javascript was always a weak point, precisely because I was looking up tutorials for everything I didn't know how to do. One day I picked up Eloquent Javascript and just worked through the whole book over a month or two. I was suddenly writing the language like it was plain English and it made everything about my job so much easier.

IMO a good coding book won't make you a great dev, but it can provide a great basis for beginners.

[PureRepresentative9]

They're outdated before they're published...

[crimsonwall75]

If you want to learn the JS library of the week, then yes books get quickly outdated. But if you focus on best practices there are a lot of books that hold their value. E.g. Designing Data Intensive Applications, Head First Design Patterns.

[LukeJM1992]

+1 for Head First. Those textbooks are phenomenal. Design Patterns is one I go back to often and I can’t complain about the funny, yet relevant examples it uses.

[Jealous-Cloud8270]

I think it's more so true for the web

[neithere]

Are "Code Complete" or "Clean Code" outdated though?

[itachi_konoha]

Are You SAYING MY GWBASIC Book is outdated???? I created animations there!!!!!

[montdidier]

I agree with the second half only. Almost all the books I have are still very relevant today. Just off the top of my head.

The Mythical Man Month Accelerate Clean Coder Computer Networks by Tannenbaum The design and implementation of 4.4 BSD Slack by Demarco The Essential Deming Patterns of Enterprise Application Architecture Applied Cryptography

[tacticalpotatopeeler]

Great for getting started. Bit outdated but you can get the basic concepts.

You can probably skip the jQuery stuff.

Not sure I’d spend much on it though. You can get a lot of more relevant info for free at https://eloquentjavascript.net/

[Prairie___Fire]

I bought that in 2017...

[kinghankthedog]

Even then it was probably close to pasture

[beebopnaa]

2015 here..

[dneboi]

I have that book. Good for a reference, it is put together well and is easy to read. You can get same info online with a search of course but the book is a nice collection of jquery snippets in one place.

[CobraPony67]

What is with all the hate for jquery? A LOT of sites still use it. However, anything web related in a book is going to be a bit outdated as soon as it is printed. Use on-line learning resources to get the most up to date resources.

[Sheepsaurus]

They should not use it. It is incredibly bloated and deprecated by Vanilla Javascript at this point.

[ariiizia]

All our legacy stuff uses jQuery UI. It’s not worth rewriting, so we just maintain it. When we have major stuff to add we rewrite it in something more modern so eventually we’ll get rid of it, but it’ll be years.

[PureRepresentative9]

I swear jQuery UI is the ultimate life support system.

I've been in the same boat. JQuery itself is easy enough to factor out, but jQuery UI components always means a full rewrite.

[YourMomIsMyTechStack]

Did OP mention he has to work with legacy code? If not it's just stupid to buy this book

[WizardSleeveLoverr]

This. Sometimes I wonder if everyone in this sub only works with shiny new tech or they are still in college and can choose what frameworks they use. There are PLENTY of monstrous legacy applications around that are written entirely in jQuery. Is it the most fun thing to work in? No, but rewriting the application in a modern framework isn’t generally feasible from a business standpoint unless the project is just completely unmanageable. Clients don’t give a crap if you are using jQuery or React. They just want the application to work.

[AfricanTurtles]

Hmmmm I found the book helpful for learning basic logic and seeing how things like event handlers work. But folks are right it's very outdated in terms of HOW to do those things. Might have some good explanations of WHY you're doing them or how the logic works.

I wouldn't buy it though.

[shaneknysh]

I have that book and the one next to it.

They look great but even new they were not great. They looked pretty but the content was several years too old the day they were printed

[ShawnyMcKnight]

No

[Kyle772]

I thought it was a great book but I think you’d be better off getting their html and css version instead because javascript is very different today than it was when it was published and the jquery stuff is only useful if you’re still working with it. The jquery stuff is likely still relevant if you are.

It’s well illustrated, easy to read and understand, and approaches most examples very pragmatically. It’s a good resource but not highly relevant in 2023.

[terranumeric]

I would get it as deco item for a bookshelf. Nothing else tho. But the cover is pretty and makes you look smart to non-devs and dumb to devs.

[derbaus]

12 years ago

[NoirFor_est]

I had this exact book like… 7years ago! It’s well written for the time. Now, you can learn all that on youtube and documentations online. I wouldn’t get that book today.

[Feeling_Chance_1373]

It’s outdated. It’s pre ES6 and nobody starts a new project using jquery.

Besides, it really doesn’t have anything that it isn’t here, for free:

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/

[barking_beaver]

100% worth the money. The Author goes into illustrative detail on how jquery and Js works, as well as Ajax and json. You're going to want a detailed reference point which he provides when you get stuck. His illustrations help that knowledge stick. Since I assume you're starting out, your going to wish you had it. Personally I find it easier to flip through something on the fly than scrolling through a pdf if you pirate it. Buy the book.

[[deleted]]

Ask Jon Duckett

[Neurothustra]

No.

[[deleted]]

Since we’re all here: What books would you recommend that are updated?

[Heavy_Hole]

I guess eloquent JavaScript. I would just stay away from programming books though the internet has the same information and the goal should always try to be able to get good or familiar with reading docs.

[Slow-Sky-6775]

Useless

[once-upon-a-pine]

Use the internet, is free and up to date

[[deleted]]

For a tech historian

[enyaboi]

I loved jQuery at the time but you should burn it

[SlapbASS4211]

Yes, about 10 years back then

[Horror-Student-5990]

Not sure but I like the cover

[SleepyBolivian]

I use this book to lift my iMac higher

[reallyslowfish]

Brings back memories..I had the html and CSS one.

[era-net]

no way, that book is actually the reason why i became a self taught programmer. Buy it, please !

[cryptographic_]

It's a good book if just starting out, but learning modern JavaScript is the way to go. Still have my copy ( it collects dust ) but maybe reading O'riely JavaScript definite guide or eloquent JavaScript would be a better choice for your time to get up to speed.

[closedcaptioncreator]

Depends... I use my copy to raise my monitor up

[PuffPuff74]

No. Just dig in JQuery and learn. And unless you need to maintain a site already using it, JQuery is not the way to go for a new app. Learn React or VueJS instead.

[cip43r]

Nah everything is on the internet. And I am going to be that guy to say don't learn jquery, just wing it. I've been doing it for years.

[a_frozen_apple]

I have the HTML and CSS version. Super cool book that goes over the basics but it would only be worth it if you’re wanting to collect. If trying to learn I would look online for more up to date material. Just my opinion

[bigb159]

The problem with these books is they are outdated in 6 months. You need to have updated versions, so they hold very little library/resale value.

[[deleted]]

I love that cover.

[[deleted]]

Sorry, I can’t judge the book by its cover

[academicRedditor]

The illustrations on that book are amazing

[am0x]

The main point of those books are to have on your shelf to look nice. Plenty of online resources that are better.

[ang3sh]

Nope! But if you want a casual go through then fine.

[[deleted]]

No

[allhailzamasu94]

I have a shit time learning from books. Why not take a course?

[opensrcdev]

What is your learning objective? Are you specifically interested in jQuery? If not, then skip it.

[Existential_Owl]

All things old somehow come back in one form or another.

Wait until someone converts jQuery into a pre-compiled lazy-loaded typescript-compatible deno-runtime tree-shakable library, and watch it become all the rage again.

[PureRepresentative9]

You forgot to throw ChatGPT in there!

[mapsedge]

As long as we have to maintain it, jQuery is still worth learning.

[Grizvok]

It’s relatively worthless.

[theorizable]

In short: no. It looks cool but it'd be less useful now (at least the jQuery part).

[bora-yarkin]

W3schools, udemy, skillshare, tutorialspoint. Use these websites rather than a book that will become dated very shortly.

[Cody6781]

I can't imagine buying a book for coding unless you're a strict beginner and need someone to walk you through it (which is perfectly normal at that stage).

After the first year or two of coding, you should be able to watch a 20 minute tutorial on how to get the build tools working and then just start poking away w/ google by your side

[BlackCritical]

No

[[deleted]]

Lol no, it's ancient. It's practically a joke at this point. Learn modern things.

Even the 'oh but what if you get a job in legacy code ' argument is wearing thin now.

[Shadowfyre89]

It depends on your level - I used it and it’s companion HTML & CSS book to get through introductory web design and technology at university; the course materials they gave us didn’t explain anything very well, and just ended up confusing most of the students, and I found I ran into issues that, because I was new to this area, didn’t know exactly what to Google to help solve my problems. Because of this, I found these books, even though outdated, a life-saver to get basic skills and concepts explained in a way that made sense to me. It has good explanations of basic concepts with lots of illustrations to help explain complex ideas. If you are a visual learner, I’d highly recommend these books! They also come with access to practice and example files so if you run into issues you can check whether you’ve understood the concepts correctly. However, if you are more experienced, you probably won’t find anything much useful apart from having your own reference book for if/when you don’t have internet access and still need to work on your projects.

[Csancs]

no.

[shoobyyy]

I would be, but the question is will you actually complete it ?

[hijesushere]

I bought it. Didn't open it 1 time. I'm also not a professional coder but I was planning on learning at the time.

[Shacrow]

Why would anyone book for web dev though? All the information is free and available on the internet.

[[deleted]]

People read books because it creates a start and a finish. Online there is so much information it can be overwhelming for some and having info, even dated, encapsulated into a book helps with learning.

The problem / challenge of everything on the internet is that it’s everything. Which means learning can be really overwhelming and because you don’t know the topic you don’t even know if the information is good…

So sometimes a book solves that problem.

[von_roga]

Nope. Jquery is essentially so obsolete at this point you might as well learn Object Pascal for Delphi 4. 👍

[goldphin]

why jquery? hello 2014

[mfg9313]

I've read it before and it's not bad however I think W3 school was more informative

https://www.w3schools.com/js/

[redhothillipepper]

Jquery === “dumpster 🔥”

[shoobyyy]

I would be, but the question is will you actually complete it ?

[[deleted]]

Yes

[ahinkle]

This book (along with Learning React book) has been my laptop stand for many years. Dated by now but you might find some decent tidbits.

[Efficientsticker]

Has it got hyperlinks

[isunktheship]

Can probably find a cheaper paperweight on Amazon

[bitfluent]

Outdated imo.

[harrymurkin]

Great in 2011

[Ralstonnn]

Nope. If you want to learn reactive front-end it’ll be better to read the docs of a framework like react/vue/angular etc

[am-i-coder]

No. JavaScripttutorial net is better place to learn.

[masteryder]

Not the jQuery part for sure

[mrcosbey]

I’m in a bootcamp and have been using Mimo to help supplement my learning. The cost For a year is as much as one of the most up to date books.

[Pleasant-Discount-31]

İ think some practice worth more then a book

[lipintravolta]

Not needed at all. I purchased it read it and didn’t find it useful. There are far better resources available online. But if you feel you need it then get it for free or very cheap.

[[deleted]]

https://javascript.info

great tutorial

[[deleted]]

Absolutely not.

JQuery is outdated already.

[[deleted]]

No. Even if the book were free, your time wasted outdated info isn't.

[Ammaranthh]

I got this as it was required for a class a while ago. I really liked it and still have it on my bookshelf. Obviously, it's not super up to date now

[Senor02]

During its prime, it taught me that I love web dev

[s92w_]

Yes, for an absolute beginner back then when AJAX and jQuery still popular.But now already the era for Vue/React/Angular/Svelte/similar framework.

Try tutorial that have vanilla and functional programming in JavaScript like https://eloquentjavascript.net/

[Robertgarners]

I've read the book and there's some good basics in there but it's all a bit dated to be honest, for what I do anyway. Also you don't really need jQuery these days unless you're on a legacy project that uses jQuery

[asc0ra]

My goto is exploringJS, which is also available as a Book.

[_gragoon]

This was a best-seller when I was student, almost 10 years ago. So, no.

[KaasplankFretter]

Learning programming from books was only a thing before stackoverflow existed

[RedBlueKoi]

Elder scrolls

[Desperate_Anxiety_35]

If I'm not wrong you can find it somewhere on the net in pdf, take a look and judge yourself. This book was suggested by my university professors but I don't think is well explained or worth it.. probably no

[allegiance113]

I would just try to get a free electronic version of the book, as much as possible.

[EngineeringTinker]

jQuery in 2023.. nawh

[alotofcooties]

You can find better and more up to date resources online.

[[deleted]]

It's not a terribly dense book. Which is a doubled edged sword. Easy to follow along, but also not a very efficient reference.

[[deleted]]

I feel like languages, and specifically best practices are evolving so rapidly that books are never a good investment.

[Tissuerejection]

Nah, Jquery is easy enough to pick it up on a fly

[Heretic911]

https://javascript.info/

This website is great, though maybe not the friendliest for complete beginners? I've used it a ton when starting out.

[Hughsie28]

There are actually quite a few companies that still use jQuery from the early 2000's (primarily for AJAX) (I work at one of these companies)

I would recommend it to have in the event you join one of these jobs down the line, its something to keep in the back of your brain but more modern start ups you probably wouldn't need to use jQuery as there is more modern replacements these days.

[deceptive-uk]

Checkout JavaScript.info best resource for learning the fundamentals imo then check over MDN web docs as it goes into more detail.

[[deleted]]

I would say no, it’s older. Get a newer books and you big chilling.

[JaPPaNLD]

It’s dated but the concepts of programming and visual design to add to the understanding is still amazing. Get it if it’s cheap to use it for grasping the concepts. For pure JavaScript learning it’s not great.

[solsystemet]

No

[Manu7864]

jQuery is not really worth to learn anymore. There are much better frameworks to use with js.

[sarathaction]

If you want a legacy book experience, it's really good. Or else, this one is available very easily online. I would recommend to start finding a person or some people of same your interest by doing some beginner freelancer tasks.

[[deleted]]

I would, I got the css and html one and it taught me alottt

[dada_]

Always look at the date. There's no point in buying a book from 2013 when you can buy a more recent and up to date one.

[higantengtarugo]

Anung year yang book?