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

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #36073

Re: Greasemonkey vs the other ones - iframes

Show all headers | View raw

Evertjan,

> I fail to see wat joy you get to convert responses to ad
> hominem insinuations about that responder.

I don't. Far from it actually.

But I have even less "joy" from reading a response from someone who 
complains about the usage of a word without even /trying/ to offer a better 
way.   Over time I've become very weary (and tired) of such people.

Combine that with the fact that I tried to explain whats going on /right 
next to it/, and even have provided more info when asked for to whichyou 
than replied to with some "brilliant" statement that "Well, you can only do 
this AFTER the creation," which is vague as to be unusable ("creation" ? 
when is that ?   When added to the DOM in a non-active state, or after it 
has been activated ? Or another moment perhaps ?   And again, how would that 
be different from any other element, which I *can* "kill" ?) COMING FROM A 
PERSON WHO COMPLAINS ABOUT INCORRECT WORDING and you see my disappointment 
with such a person.

No, its nothing personal.   I just can't stand hypocrites who demand a 
certain "correct" behaviour from others, but fail in any way to give the 
same back.

Is that clear enough for you ?

> Forget monkeys for a moment and imagine this:

Yeah, lets forget that GreaseMonkey can execute scripts to modify the DOM 
/before/ its actually activated, and than complain about how you can't hoist 
yourself by your own petard.   Dishonest much ?   Or just having zero clue 
to what GreaseMonkey is or does ?

> Would there be any script that can prevent the iframe from
> being created?

Go away.  Please.   And only come back when you have googeled to what 
GreaseMonkey is for.

And in that case be sure to respond to the others(my) "but why than ..." 
points of consideration / requests for clarification instead of bluntly 
ignoring it.   And for the record: I take such a refusal/ingoring as either 
"I have no clue to what he said" or an "I do not want to admit I am wrong". 
Which one of the two reasons is yours ?

Also, I asked if either Tamper or ViolentMonkey did it different than 
GreaseMonkey.   You discarded that question without as much as a word, let 
alone an explanation, and replaced it with your own one.  Arrogant much ?

And as that solution to your own question has no value to me you've just 
wasted your time.  Congrats with that.

Yes, I'm tired.  I'm /very/ tired from having to fight people to answer /my/ 
questions instead of whatever they feel they want to do instead.  And I 
guess it starts to show.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

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

Thread

Greasemonkey getComputedStyle doesn't doesn't return the expected-and-confirmed value. "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-21 12:39 +0100
  Re: Greasemonkey getComputedStyle doesn't doesn't return the expected-and-confirmed value. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2019-02-22 00:05 +0100
    Re: Greasemonkey getComputedStyle doesn't doesn't return the expected-and-confirmed value. "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-22 08:59 +0100
      Re: Greasemonkey getComputedStyle doesn't doesn't return the expected-and-confirmed value. Flng Fck <nothanks@invalid.invalid> - 2019-02-22 09:05 +0100
        Re: Greasemonkey getComputedStyle doesn't doesn't return the expected-and-confirmed value. "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-22 10:50 +0100
  Re: Greasemonkey getComputedStyle doesn't doesn't return the expected-and-confirmed value. Joao Rodrigues <jr.c.l.js@gmail.com> - 2019-02-21 21:51 -0300
    Re: Greasemonkey getComputedStyle doesn't doesn't return the expected-and-confirmed value. "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-22 09:29 +0100
  Re: Greasemonkey getComputedStyle doesn't doesn't return the expected-and-confirmed value. JJ <jj4public@vfemail.net> - 2019-02-22 18:49 +0700
    Re: Greasemonkey getComputedStyle doesn't doesn't return the expected-and-confirmed value. "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-22 13:51 +0100
      Re: Greasemonkey getComputedStyle doesn't doesn't return the expected-and-confirmed value. Update. "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-22 14:34 +0100
        Re: Greasemonkey getComputedStyle doesn't doesn't return the expected-and-confirmed value.Solved. "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-22 15:12 +0100
      Re: Greasemonkey getComputedStyle doesn't doesn't return the expected-and-confirmed value. JJ <jj4public@vfemail.net> - 2019-02-23 10:18 +0700
        Re: Greasemonkey getComputedStyle doesn't doesn't return the expected-and-confirmed value. "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-23 09:53 +0100
          Re: Greasemonkey getComputedStyle doesn't doesn't return the expected-and-confirmed value. JJ <jj4public@vfemail.net> - 2019-02-23 18:14 +0700
            Re: Greasemonkey getComputedStyle doesn't doesn't return the expected-and-confirmed value. "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-25 18:53 +0100
              Re: Greasemonkey vs the other ones - iframes "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-26 10:23 +0100
                Re: Greasemonkey vs the other ones - iframes "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2019-02-26 11:27 +0100
                Re: Greasemonkey vs the other ones - iframes "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-26 12:54 +0100
                Re: Greasemonkey vs the other ones - iframes "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2019-02-26 19:26 +0100
                Re: Greasemonkey vs the other ones - iframes "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-27 10:45 +0100
                Re: Greasemonkey vs the other ones - iframes "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2019-02-27 12:09 +0100
                Re: Greasemonkey vs the other ones - iframes "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-27 12:34 +0100
                Re: Greasemonkey vs the other ones - iframes "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2019-02-28 11:07 +0100
                Re: Greasemonkey vs the other ones - iframes "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-28 12:46 +0100
                Re: Greasemonkey vs the other ones - iframes "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2019-02-28 22:41 +0100
                Re: Greasemonkey vs the other ones - iframes "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-03-01 09:59 +0100
                Re: Greasemonkey vs the other ones - iframes "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2019-03-01 10:55 +0100
                Re: Greasemonkey vs the other ones - iframes "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-03-01 11:40 +0100
                Re: Greasemonkey vs the other ones - iframes "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2019-03-01 16:08 +0100
                Re: Greasemonkey vs the other ones - iframes JJ <jj4public@vfemail.net> - 2019-02-27 00:12 +0700
                Re: Greasemonkey vs the other ones - iframes "R.Wieser" <address@not.available> - 2019-02-27 10:39 +0100

csiph-web