Seems odd that they would rename a method based on an old library using.
One of the major design points of the web as a platform is that old sites shouldn't break. While MooTools isn't as popular these days, it was one of the more popular JavaScript libraries many years ago, and a lot of sites still use it.
The issue with MooTools is that it prefers the built-in method (if one exists) over its own method. If it always overwrote the native method, we wouldn't have issues like this. This is also why "ponyfills" never use the native implementation of a function, even if available.
I haven't heard of or thought about MooTools for a very long time (thanks to jQuery).
One of the major design points of the web as a platform is that old sites shouldn't break. While MooTools isn't as popular these days, it was one of the more popular JavaScript libraries many years ago, and a lot of sites still use it.
The issue with MooTools is that it prefers the built-in method (if one exists) over its own method. If it always overwrote the native method, we wouldn't have issues like this. This is also why "ponyfills" never use the native implementation of a function, even if available.
MooTools was always better than jQuery, though. jqueryvsmootools.com/