Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ajax implementation is too lightweight #15

Closed
jods4 opened this issue Oct 6, 2014 · 4 comments
Closed

ajax implementation is too lightweight #15

jods4 opened this issue Oct 6, 2014 · 4 comments
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@jods4
Copy link

jods4 commented Oct 6, 2014

A few things jQuery does and I really miss:

  1. Set the content-type myself: I often post JSON payloads to my server.
  2. Return the xhr object (or a wrapper): e.g. to be able to call .cancel() on it.
  3. Return a Promise, because programming async code with callbacks is hell when you do more than trivial stuff. This is also the way to go with modern browsers (await is proposed for ES7).
@kenwheeler
Copy link
Collaborator

Agreed. Look for it in 0.0.3

@kenwheeler kenwheeler added this to the 0.0.3 milestone Oct 27, 2014
@kenwheeler kenwheeler self-assigned this Oct 27, 2014
@simeydotme
Copy link
Collaborator

https://github.com/pyrsmk/qwest
https://github.com/github/fetch

^^ think these are the best AJAX libraries to use :) - they are nice and familiar for jQuery users - perhaps can add them to the CASH page like we did for Velocity :)

@joezimjs
Copy link
Contributor

Looks like there is no AJAX implementation (according to README) for 1.0. Should this be closed?

@shshaw
Copy link
Collaborator

shshaw commented Apr 12, 2016

AJAX is no longer a part of cash, as of version 1.0.0. As @simeydotme suggested, try using an AJAX specific library like fetch for jQuery-less AJAX support.

@shshaw shshaw closed this as completed Apr 12, 2016
This was referenced Apr 17, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants