Path: csiph.com!news.mixmin.net!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!news.solani.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Christoph M. Becker" Newsgroups: comp.lang.javascript Subject: Re: Read binary file Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 17:15:57 +0100 Organization: solani.org Lines: 46 Message-ID: References: <145821661.4prVZSFEgG@PointedEars.de> <2237637.9AE1fihV9u@PointedEars.de> <6005521.MME42bj82n@PointedEars.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: solani.org 1458836153 6725 eJwNyEkRwAAIBDBL3CxyKAX/EtpfJq7BMWnhYX5+MjypL83G/UTOwXKftPUjFngrW4qqeoBuZ6R6okm93aS25rW6MizxOGD1LzUEYoQPiLwdGA== (24 Mar 2016 16:15:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@news.solani.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2016 16:15:53 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0 X-User-ID: eJwFwQkBwDAIA0BLhCctcmAF/xJ2F0bwO86gx8Y+aL+LKpeI7cQdKjPrcAHPtumGgiMjVvsDF94Q8w== In-Reply-To: Cancel-Lock: sha1:/sxWtQriAmtOmEnxDuwwWmbfr+Q= X-NNTP-Posting-Host: eJwNy8kRACEIBMCUYIURw+Fw8g9hfXe1Lyh6GxzmdLLvUfvsIKVqPDX4NDpXQbwwd9KjlSxZESpYF4N4a+0hT8a222rRdyha35EpyWbAmj+v/B8f Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.javascript:30109 Herbert Kleebauer wrote: > On 24.03.2016 11:31, Christoph M. Becker wrote: > >> Herbert Kleebauer wrote: > >>> 3. And there is javascript, a name for a group of languages which >>> implements ECMA-262 or part of it or are just similar to >>> ECMA-262 or JavaScript. > >> NAK. The term "javascript" is not generally understood to be synonymous >> to "ECMAScript implementations". > > Who is "generally"? I meant to say that not everybody understands the term "javascript" as you have defined it above. Therefore your definition is not generally accepted. >> Anyhow, one of the issues when using >> the umbrella term "javascript" is that often not only "ECMAScript >> implementations" are meant, but rather libraries/APIs (e.g. the DOM) are >> meant as well what dilutes the discussion even more. > > Sure. A "if", "for" or "while" doesn't need much discussion. I > really would prefer a good documented minimal low level API. > For example to read a binary file by http or ftp into an > internal array without blocking sites different from the > original html site. I even wouldn't care if I had to do > the jpeg decoding with my own code. And that's exactly the crux. Asking for a "good[sic] documented minimal low level API" for "javascript" is simply too imprecise (at best). Which environments do you target? Browsers? Which ones? Which versions? Some ECMAScript implementation running on a server? Or something else (e.g. Windows Scripting Host, Komodo Edit). > But what has this all to do with the statement: > > "There is no javascript." See above. -- Christoph M. Becker