Comments on: JavaScript File & Folder Structures: Just Pick One

By: lyman

lyman — Tue, 08 Jan 2013 16:36:00 +0000

hmm, Thx ;)

By: Derick Bailey

Derick Bailey — Tue, 08 Jan 2013 14:33:00 +0000

yes, definitely. but don’t make the same mistake I made – don’t load every file individually from the server, as needed. that kills performance with network lag. instead, build pre-packaged “apps” or sub-apps that can be loaded from the server in a single call.

By: lyman

lyman — Tue, 08 Jan 2013 14:32:00 +0000

While Develop more and more complicate apps(maybe like gmail) then I think we will care about the struct. As that we want using AMD(like requirejs) to load the js file as needed? Not just load all file at once.

By: Bjarni Thorisson

Bjarni Thorisson — Thu, 22 Nov 2012 11:09:00 +0000

Looking at the bbclonemail project on github I can see you’ve ended up with a flat structure having filenames like bbclonemail.mailapp.mailbox.js.
Did you change your mind or haven’t you gotten around to updating the structure?

By: Ryan Johnston

Ryan Johnston — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 21:52:00 +0000

Completely agree with your opinion Derick especially in a practical matter.

I found working with RequireJS if I used a type based folder structure when it came to optimization RequireJS would have issues as “person.js” (model) and “person.js” (collection) cause name spacing issues if you were trying to build one module unless you hard coded the name in the define method which defeats it’s purpose.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 15:54:00 +0000

Good stuff Derick. Organization with JS is tough sometimes, but then I take a deep breath and realize, it doesn’t REALLY matter all that much as long as I and the members of my team all have a good understanding about how our app works!

By: Tim Branyen

Tim Branyen — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 13:40:00 +0000

Completely agree about organizing code around the type of Class it is. Lumping dozens of Models into a single folder just seems like a completely awful way of structuring your code.