Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!news2.arglkargh.de!noris.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool2.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Message-ID: <2808588.8yECor7tte@PointedEars.de> From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn Reply-To: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn Organization: PointedEars Software (PES) Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2013 10:17:16 +0200 User-Agent: KNode/4.10.5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit X-Face: %i>XG-yXR'\"2P/C_aO%~;2o~?g0pPKmbOw^=NT`tprDEf++D.m7"}HW6.#=U:?2GGctkL,f89@H46O$ASoW&?s}.k+&. <2367596.uRJ2TEEu9r@PointedEars.de> <520d71f9$0$6549$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arcor-online.net> <1ovr09hj0vu6taa1fi31jm77j4rvfuakd0@4ax.com> <520ea01e$0$6638$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Lines: 38 NNTP-Posting-Date: 18 Aug 2013 10:17:18 CEST NNTP-Posting-Host: dc181f7b.newsspool2.arcor-online.net X-Trace: DXC=YX5ZLEA18PS[7Non7UCi8UA9EHlD;3YcR4Fo<]lROoRQ8kF John Harris wrote: >> Christoph Michael Becker wrote: >>> So I suggest to stick with the generally accepted facts: there is >>> JavaScript[TM], there is ECMAScript--but there is no javascript (at >>> least _i_ cOnSiDeR cOrReT cApiTalIsAtIoN aN iMpOrTaNt cOnCePt, john). >> >> There is also LiveScript, JScript[TM], ActionScript, and probably a >> few more. >> >> LiveScript was not, is not, and never will be a dialect of ECMAScript. >> This is because ECMAScript is derived from LiveScript. > > Obviously you're talking about Netscape's LiveScript (not the indirect > descendant of CoffeeScript with the same name). IMO the reason that > LiveScript was not, is not, and never will be a "dialect of ECMAScript" > is, that it was renamed to JavaScript long before ECMAScript was going > to be standardized. Assuming there was such a thing as a “dialect of ECMAScript”, neither would be Mocha and JavaScript 1.0. However, this is a purely academical discussion now as Mocha, LiveScript, and all JavaScript versions before 1.3 (Netscape 4.0 [1997], for some people even after that) went the way of the dinosaur, and are no longer discussed here on a regular basis. > Anyway, if replying to a support request with (at least partial) > constructive criticism, instead of just serving the answer, gives this > newsgroup a lousy reputation, I'm gladly willing to bear with it. Also, when you post here, it is never a support request. This is _not_ a support forum, it is a *newsgroup* (where people are discussing subjects). -- PointedEars Twitter: @PointedEars2 Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.