Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #18037
| Path | csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!xlned.com!feeder1.xlned.com!npeer.de.kpn-eurorings.net!npeer-ng0.de.kpn-eurorings.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool4.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset="UTF-8" |
| Message-ID | <2135847.KEoUBZbHTU@PointedEars.de> (permalink) |
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
| Reply-To | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <usenet@PointedEars.de> |
| Organization | PointedEars Software (PES) |
| Date | Wed, 09 Jan 2013 21:03:06 +0100 |
| User-Agent | KNode/4.4.11 |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | 8Bit |
| Subject | Re: Request for opinions on my newbie approach |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.javascript |
| References | <kcilrc$vt8$1@dont-email.me> <10136443.OnBuAidq6I@PointedEars.de> <a2hre85m1aojpu1l2a46uqbklvnhq7ih3h@4ax.com> <kckh5m$d5l$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| Followup-To | comp.lang.javascript |
| MIME-Version | 1.0 |
| Lines | 36 |
| NNTP-Posting-Date | 09 Jan 2013 21:03:07 CET |
| NNTP-Posting-Host | d9e86cbd.newsspool2.arcor-online.net |
| X-Trace | DXC=e1TfLnR_Cdo>jlK2>IgHGdA9EHlD;3Ycb4Fo<]lROoRa8kF<OcfhCOkZ`RZ1E_PbLoDZm8W4\YJNlb@mF9jNikde3>YBYU3JEomcGm;JCkQ1al |
| X-Complaints-To | usenet-abuse@arcor.de |
| Xref | csiph.com comp.lang.javascript:18037 |
Followups directed to: comp.lang.javascript
Show key headers only | View raw
Cezary Tomczyk wrote: > Jim T. pisze: >> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >>> Leonardo Azpurua wrote: > [...] >>>> for (var i = 0; i < f.elements.length; i++) >>> >>> for (var i = 0, len = f.elements.length; i < len; ++i) >> >> Why? Because it's faster? First, modern JS interpreters will probably >> already do this optimization. Second, unless the form has a million >> elements it will make no noticeable difference. Cleaner code is better >> than pointless "optimization". > > I wonder: what is not clean in this code? > > for (var i = 0, len = f.elements.length; i < len; ++i) > > Maybe you can write it as (as you want): > > for (var i = 0, len = f.elements.length; i < len; i += 1) > > Still can not see what can be confused here for developer. It's just a > simple, one line begin of loop. Probably they are under the illusion that they have a shadow of a clue what they are talking about (which was “modern JS interpreters” – OMG), and that I would care very much about the humble opinion of address-munging nobodys. Or they are just a troll. Do not feed. -- PointedEars Twitter: @PointedEars2 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
Request for opinions on my newbie approach "Leonardo Azpurua" <leonardo@exmvps.org> - 2013-01-08 22:24 -0430
Re: Request for opinions on my newbie approach Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-01-09 04:31 +0100
Re: Request for opinions on my newbie approach "Leonardo Azpurua" <leonardo@exmvps.org> - 2013-01-08 23:34 -0430
Re: Request for opinions on my newbie approach Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-01-09 05:14 +0100
Re: Request for opinions on my newbie approach Jim T. <x@y.z> - 2013-01-09 14:32 -0500
Re: Request for opinions on my newbie approach Cezary Tomczyk <cezary.tomczyk@gmail.com> - 2013-01-09 20:41 +0100
Re: Request for opinions on my newbie approach Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-01-09 21:03 +0100
Re: Request for opinions on my newbie approach Jim T. <x@y.z> - 2013-01-09 15:11 -0500
Re: Request for opinions on my newbie approach Luc Yen <luc@goal.tw> - 2013-01-09 14:38 -0800
Re: Request for opinions on my newbie approach "Leonardo Azpurua" <leonardo@exmvps.org> - 2013-01-09 18:10 -0430
Re: Request for opinions on my newbie approach Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-01-10 01:36 +0100
csiph-web