and use a modular library like mootools.
A lot of site today are currently using prototype and script.aculo.us and their own site.js with all those ajax calls, hideMenu(); etc
Jonathan, I also highly recommend NaturalDocs (naturaldocs.org). It's a perl script that will take your inline documentation and turn it into an html site that's searchable and browsable. I used this for Mootools docs and then again on our own (CNET) and it works great.
Put it together with something like /packer/ and you have a way to keep track of everything you write.
I agree with Uriel. When you're using something like Dean Edwards' packer, variable name lengths don't really matter. I usually keep most of my variable names pretty short though (obj, el, arr...).
Also, I can't agree more with you about hungarian notation. I didn't know that it had a name; I just thought it was something annoying that people did.
I totally agree. I'm a bit of a "best practices" junkie, with common tasks written as functions (sometimes namespaced depending on usage) linked out as a separate script. If a lot of script is needed only on one area of the site, it will only be included there.
As far as variable naming goes, I always use short but descriptive names: element, anchors, fieldGroup etc.
I'd love to see what would happen if the guys behind jQuery, Prototype & MooTools collaborated on a JS framework. All of the above have similar goals but go about them in completely different ways.
Hi. My name is Jonathan Snook and this is my site. I write about what interests me, which is usually web design, development, and technology. I'm also in the middle of a food adventure and I like whisky.
I wrote SMACSS. I tweet. Want to learn more?
© Jonathan Snook