Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!news.solani.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn Newsgroups: comp.lang.javascript Subject: Re: Definition of a script in JavaScript Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2015 17:37:55 +0100 Organization: PointedEars Software (PES) Lines: 30 Message-ID: <11409371.vLMhksEnQf@PointedEars.de> References: <1843703.7QeMqOPspv@PointedEars.de> <59a1a1bf-a981-43d6-aa1d-2244f9ba5b4e@googlegroups.com> Reply-To: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit X-Trace: solani.org 1424536759 31597 eJwFwQkBwDAIA0BL5QsgZ6HFv4TdhUEw6Qh4bKxFohqXdHNGJ7SgcjL3yTYHR+d+ZVtc2vsBA80Q5w== (21 Feb 2015 16:39:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@news.solani.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2015 16:39:19 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: KNode/4.14.2 X-User-ID: eJwFwQkRADAIAzBLfC0gZ3CbfwlL4FRuBsHAwwuNhimMGDBrTxvdTapObc8dTrwJXnVOOyM3n8kRXbmUDxlEFEA= Cancel-Lock: sha1:dlDxSnI0Oo19IhP9lfi11gQuGeM= X-NNTP-Posting-Host: eJwVyMkRACAIBLCWYLm0HAHpvwTHPGPi7BXq5mpjw6CqU3Ix0aHNvFNCAv03E2tVX2yeJkXSAyb9EXc= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.javascript:26883 Christoph M. Becker wrote: > Scott Sauyet wrote: >> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >>> [ ... ] [T]here is no "javascript"; certainly there is no such >>> thing as "valid javascript" [ ... ] >> >> > > Isn't it worthwhile to hint at the uncommon spelling of the word > "javascript" (at least)? The point here is that there cannot be a universally agreed definition as to what constitutes “valid javascript” because even if we accept the fact that ”javascript” stands in for “ECMAScript implementations” (which I recommend against because of ambiguity), those implementations *differ*: That which is *syntactically* valid (i.e. compiles) in one implementation does not need to be in another (as a case in point, we discussed the use of “`…`” for template strings in Mozilla JavaScript – not supported elsewhere [as of yet]; there are many other such examples). So the notion of “valid javascript” can only be called nonsense, employed only by the un(der)informed or blatantly ignorant. -- PointedEars FAQ: | SVN: Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.