Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #31472

Re: n00b considering Java Script

Show all headers | View raw

Andreas Bergmaier wrote:

> Scott Sauyet wrote:
>> The undoubted best reference guide is David Flanagan's _JavaScript: The
>> Definitive Guide_.
> 
> Actually I was quite disappointed when I got my hands on it. Maybe it
> was just an old edition, but it did describe in detail APIs that are
> completely outdated now and gave examples that would be considered a bad
> practice today.

,-<http://PointedEars.de/scripts/faq/cljs/#books>
| 
| 3.1 What books are recommended for javascript?
| 
| Most javascript books have been found to contain so many technical errors 
| that consensus recommendations have not emerged from the group.
| 
| The following books have been considered to have value by some individuals 
| on c.l.js. The reviews of these books are provided: […]

(I inherited this section verbatim from the previous FAQ.)

<https://ssearch.oreilly.com/?q=javascript+definitive+guide> finds only 
<http://shop.oreilly.com/product/9780596805531.do>, so the current and 
apparently final 6th edition was released in 2011-04 (CE).

Not only is that hopelessly outdated now given that ECMAScript Edition 5.1 
was released in 2011-06 (and so that book cannot possibly cover the 
corrections in Ed. 5.1; although it does cover Edition 5 of 2009-12), 6.0 in 
2015-06, and 7.0 in 2016-06.  It also *still* does not clearly distinguish 
between the programming language and the language-neutral interfaces that 
can be accessed with it.  The knowing reader is forced to read:

<https://library.oreilly.com/book/9780596805531/javascript-the-definitive-guide/242.xhtml?ref=toc>
| 
| Part II. Client-Side JavaScript
| 
| This part of the book, Chapters 13 through 22, documents JavaScript as it 
| is implemented in web browsers. These chapters introduce a variety of 
| scriptable objects that represent web browser windows, documents and 
| document content. They also explain important web application APIs for 
| networking, storing and retrieving data, and drawing graphics: […]

It has inherited this, which now must be considered a *gross mistake*, from 
its previous editions starting in 1996, when there *was* “Client-side 
JavaScript” (1.0 to 1.3) in Netscape Navigator/Communicator 2.0 to 4.8.  
However, with JavaScript 1.4 for Netscape Enterprise Server, Netscape made 
the split and there was no more “Client-side JavaScript” in the official 
reference as of Mozilla JavaScript 1.5 (2000-09) when Netscape 6.x, based on 
Mozilla.org code, implemented W3C DOM Level 1 (1998-10) and shortly after, 
Level 2 (2000-11).  So in that sense, the book is 16 years out of date now.

<http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix/#timeline>
<http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix/#javascript>

In Flanagan’s defense, he has added a chapter describing the DOM:

<https://library.oreilly.com/book/9780596805531/javascript-the-definitive-guide/287.xhtml?ref=toc>

But he does not make clear that “Client-side JavaScript” is now actually 
using *any* implementation of ECMAScript to access the language-independent 
interfaces, and that *“window”* *and* *the* *rest* *of* *the* *DOM* *are* 
*not* *parts* *of* *JavaScript/ECMAScript*.

And a distinction between the various differing implementations of 
ECMAScript and their use in different runtime environments (*including* Web 
browsers) is *still* absent, purporting the common misconception that there 
is only one programming language with browser-specific “dialects” and 
“bugs”, giving rise to the previous FAQ’s mistake (inherited by the current 
FAQ, but at least commented on there) of talking about a convenient, 
fairytale “javascript” language.  There is no mention of Mozilla JavaScript 
in XUL applications; V8 JavaScript in Chromium, with Node.js, and in 
MongoDB; of Microsoft JScript in IE, and JScript.NET and TypeScript in VS 
(Code) and for IIS/.NET Core, and JavaScript in Adobe Reader, to name just a 
few.

<http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix/#foreword>

Apparently the 6th edition corrected some of the more obvious blunders like 
listing “[]” as an “array operator” in the “Operator Overview” section, 
found and criticized by Richard Cornford here in a review of the 5th edition 
in 2007.  But how many of those blunders remain uncorrected is uncertain 
until a full review.  Back then, Richard *randomly* opened pages in that 
edition and every one of them contained obvious blunders (to read it, see 
above).
 
> When looking for a reference guide, MDN
> <https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web> rarely fails me (though
> it does occasionally contain mistakes, being a wiki). It's not a printed
> reference of course, but I'd question the usefulness of such anyway in a
> world with fast-moving standards.

ACK.

-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

Back to comp.lang.javascript | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

n00b considering Java Script Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-09-25 14:09 +0000
  Re: n00b considering Java Script WaltS <thalionusa@REMOVEaim.com> - 2016-09-25 11:22 -0400
    Re: n00b considering Java Script Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-09-25 16:12 +0000
      Re: n00b considering Java Script WaltS <thalionusa@REMOVEaim.com> - 2016-09-25 12:33 -0400
    Re: n00b considering Java Script Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-09-25 18:23 +0200
      Re: n00b considering Java Script WaltS <thalionusa@REMOVEaim.com> - 2016-09-25 12:32 -0400
        Re: n00b considering Java Script Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2016-09-25 19:36 +0100
          Re: n00b considering Java Script WaltS <thalionusa@REMOVEaim.com> - 2016-09-25 16:25 -0400
        Re: n00b considering Java Script Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-09-25 21:23 +0200
          Re: n00b considering Java Script John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2016-09-26 10:28 +0100
      Re: n00b considering Java Script John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2016-09-26 10:22 +0100
      Re: n00b considering Java Script Andreas Bergmaier <andber93@web.de> - 2016-09-26 23:10 +0200
        Re: n00b considering Java Script Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-09-27 06:27 +0200
          Re: n00b considering Java Script Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-09-27 06:43 +0200
  Re: n00b considering Java Script Gregor Kofler <usenet@gregorkofler.com> - 2016-09-25 23:57 +0200
  Re: n00b considering Java Script Scott Sauyet <scott@sauyet.com> - 2016-09-25 22:47 +0000
    Re: n00b considering Java Script Marek Novotny <marek.novotny@marspolar.com> - 2016-09-26 01:00 +0000
    Re: n00b considering Java Script Andreas Bergmaier <andber93@web.de> - 2016-09-26 23:22 +0200
      Re: n00b considering Java Script Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-09-27 08:18 +0200
        Re: n00b considering Java Script John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2016-09-27 19:12 +0100
      Re: n00b considering Java Script Scott Sauyet <scott@sauyet.com> - 2016-09-30 03:14 +0000

csiph-web