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

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #22794 > unrolled thread

Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed?

Started by"Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com>
First post2014-01-26 02:37 -0800
Last post2014-02-09 10:33 +0100
Articles 4 on this page of 64 — 10 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.javascript

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-26 02:37 -0800
    Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-01-26 11:52 +0100
      Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-26 12:04 -0800
        Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-01-26 22:24 +0100
          Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-26 14:49 -0800
            Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-01-27 02:14 +0100
              Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-27 18:30 -0800
                Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-01-28 19:08 +0100
                  Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-01-28 19:50 +0100
                    Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-01-28 21:18 +0100
                      Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-01-28 22:27 +0100
                        Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-01-28 23:23 +0100
                          Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-01-29 17:12 +0100
                            Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-01-31 22:30 +0100
                              Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-02-01 22:35 +0100
                      Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-28 19:59 -0800
                        Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-01-31 14:08 +0100
                          Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-02-01 22:52 +0100
                            Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-02-02 10:09 -0800
                              Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-02-04 23:42 +0100
                    Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-28 19:40 -0800
                      Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-01-29 17:17 +0100
                        Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-29 16:51 -0800
                          Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-01-31 01:06 +0100
                  Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-28 19:36 -0800
                    Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-01-31 14:47 +0100
        Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2014-01-27 14:36 +0000
          Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-27 16:05 -0800
            Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2014-01-29 15:26 +0000
              Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-29 16:44 -0800
                "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-01-30 11:10 +0100
                  Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-30 10:38 +0000
                    Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-01-30 13:30 +0100
                      Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2014-01-30 12:45 +0000
                        Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-01-30 14:05 +0100
                          Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Dr J R Stockton <reply1400@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2014-01-31 21:32 +0000
                            OT: "impedance mismatch" (was: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed?) Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-02-01 01:15 +0100
                            Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2014-02-01 02:40 +0000
                              Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-02-01 10:02 +0100
                            Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-02-01 09:54 +0100
                  Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2014-01-30 11:06 +0000
                    Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-01-30 14:02 +0100
                      Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "ViLco" <villiber@tin.it> - 2014-01-30 16:24 +0100
                      Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2014-01-31 00:35 +0000
                        Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-01-31 11:16 +0100
                  Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-30 15:14 -0800
                    Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-01-31 00:56 +0100
                      Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-30 22:13 -0800
                        Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-01-31 11:51 +0100
                  Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Dr J R Stockton <J.R.Stockton@physics.org> - 2014-01-31 19:58 +0000
                    Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-02-01 09:30 +0100
                      Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Dr J R Stockton <reply1400@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2014-02-02 17:44 +0000
                        Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-02-03 01:15 +0100
                          Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2014-02-03 14:58 +0000
                            Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-02-03 15:36 +0000
                              Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-02-03 17:59 +0100
                                Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-02-03 17:18 +0000
                                  Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-02-03 19:47 +0100
                                Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2014-02-04 10:33 +0000
                                  Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-02-06 13:40 +0100
                            Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Dr J R Stockton <reply1400@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2014-02-06 10:12 +0000
                              Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-02-07 10:32 +0100
                                Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Dr J R Stockton <reply1400@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2014-02-08 23:06 +0000
                                  Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-02-09 10:33 +0100

Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]

#23017 — Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed?

FromDr J R Stockton <reply1400@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid>
Date2014-02-06 10:12 +0000
SubjectRe: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed?
Message-ID<0t27gDqaA28SFw35@invalid.uk.co.demon.merlyn.invalid>
In reply to#22948
In comp.lang.javascript message <vkbve9pkmh1pctli55ol37vg7sb93g0km9@4ax.
com>, Mon, 3 Feb 2014 14:58:59, John Harris
<niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> posted:

>On Mon, 03 Feb 2014 01:15:21 +0100, "Evertjan."
><exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> wrote:
>
>>Dr J R Stockton <reply1400@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote on 02 feb
>>2014 in comp.lang.javascript:
>
>  <snip>
>>> Impedance reflects not just the quadrature component.
>>
>>That is a matter of definition.
>  <snip>
>
>Yes indeed! Unfortunately, your definition differs from everyone
>else's. Even the Oxford dictionary defines impedance as the whole
>thing, with a resistive component and a reactive component.

There is a reason for the English expression "Double-Dutch", which is
not really given by <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_dutch>.

-- 
 (c) John Stockton, nr London UK        Reply address via Merlyn Home Page.
   news:comp.lang.javascript FAQ <http://www.jibbering.com/faq/index.html>.
   <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/js-index.htm> jscr maths, dates, sources.
   <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> TP/BP/Delphi/jscr/&c, FAQ items, links.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23019 — Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed?

From"Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net>
Date2014-02-07 10:32 +0100
SubjectRe: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed?
Message-ID<XnsA2CD6B4AA237Feejj99@194.109.133.133>
In reply to#23017
Dr J R Stockton <reply1400@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote on 06 feb 2014 
in comp.lang.javascript:

>>Yes indeed! Unfortunately, your definition differs from everyone
>>else's. Even the Oxford dictionary defines impedance as the whole
>>thing, with a resistive component and a reactive component.
> 
> There is a reason for the English expression "Double-Dutch", which is
> not really given by <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_dutch>.

Isn't it lovely when you don't dare to talk about a difficult subject,
like resistance and impedance, to quibble about the "real definition" and go 
ad hominem.

Shame on you, John.

-- 
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23032 — Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed?

FromDr J R Stockton <reply1400@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid>
Date2014-02-08 23:06 +0000
SubjectRe: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed?
Message-ID<JjjUz+nLir9SFwoY@invalid.uk.co.demon.merlyn.invalid>
In reply to#23019
In comp.lang.javascript message <XnsA2CD6B4AA237Feejj99@194.109.133.133>
, Fri, 7 Feb 2014 10:32:49, Evertjan. <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net>
posted:

>Dr J R Stockton <reply1400@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote on 06 feb 2014
>in comp.lang.javascript:
>
>>>Yes indeed! Unfortunately, your definition differs from everyone
>>>else's. Even the Oxford dictionary defines impedance as the whole
>>>thing, with a resistive component and a reactive component.
>>
>> There is a reason for the English expression "Double-Dutch", which is
>> not really given by <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_dutch>.
>
>Isn't it lovely when you don't dare to talk about a difficult subject,
>like resistance and impedance, to quibble about the "real definition" and go
>ad hominem.

Perhaps you are not aware of my professional work.  There is nothing
difficult about resistance and impedance, for the cognoscenti; and a man
like Maimonides would have had no trouble in understanding them, if he
had first taken the trouble to invent electricity.  But I am too young
to have known Volta, Ampere, or Ohm personally.  I'm reminded that a
colleague once had trouble with admittance, however.

Do you have evidence for the truth of "Vanwege de bekendheid van de
(commerciële) naam Siemens wordt de eenheid van admittantie in de
praktijk vaak mho genoemd (= ohm achterstevoren geschreven)."?

-- 
 (c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK.  ¬@merlyn.demon.co.uk   Turnpike v6.05   MIME.
   Web  <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
 Proper <= 4-line sig. separator as above, a line exactly "-- " (SonOfRFC1036)
 Do not Mail News to me. Before a reply, quote with ">" or "> " (SonOfRFC1036)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23033 — Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed?

From"Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net>
Date2014-02-09 10:33 +0100
SubjectRe: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed?
Message-ID<XnsA2CF6B7077E39eejj99@194.109.133.133>
In reply to#23032
Dr J R Stockton <reply1400@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> wrote on 09 feb 2014 
in comp.lang.javascript:

> Perhaps you are not aware of my professional work.  There is nothing
> difficult about resistance and impedance, for the cognoscenti; and a man
> like Maimonides would have had no trouble in understanding them, if he
> had first taken the trouble to invent electricity.  But I am too young
> to have known Volta, Ampere, or Ohm personally.  I'm reminded that a
> colleague once had trouble with admittance, however.

I think discussing by authority, be it the christian dogmatic way,
is a very bad way of discussion. Discussion should better be about the 
"why" someone said so, not about the "who" said it.

The Rambam, Rabbi Moshe bar Maimon [Córdoba 30 Mar 1135-Fustat 13 Dec 1204]
was an outstanding scholar and phylosopher, his teachings being debated 
daily among the Jewish, but only about his arguments, not because it was he 
who said something. And his incidental kneefall to dogmatism is widely 
ridiculed in Jewish "lehrnen".

Too young? John, we both are older than the Rambam ever was. ;-)
 
> Do you have evidence for the truth of "Vanwege de bekendheid van de
> (commerci‰le) naam Siemens wordt de eenheid van admittantie in de
> praktijk vaak mho genoemd (= ohm achterstevoren geschreven)."?

Siemens (unit). Mho is an alternative name of the same unit, the reciprocal 
of one ohm. Mho is derived from spelling ohm backwards and is written with 
an upside-down capital Greek letter Omega, Unicode symbol U+2127.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mho#Mho>

Evidently, I give my admittance, the "why" sounds ludicrously illogical. 

Even so the family name of Siemens was of Dutch stock,
from the county of Holland, meaning the patronymic "son of Sijmen".

Long time ago at Dry Island Buffalo Jump in Alberta, I met a man named 
"Siemens", whose ancestors fled the Ukraine during the Russian revolution, 
where they had lived in Dutch speaking [ultra?]orthodox protestant villages 
after emigrating with their sect from the Netherlands long before, to 
preserve their own cherished dogmatism. 

Perhaps he was from this Canadian Ukraine family:
<http://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?
op=GET&db=ukraine&id=I65524>

"Ernst Werner Siemens", a Hannover county son of a tenant farmer probably 
from Dutch descent, added the nobel "von" in "von Siemens" at the age of 72.

"Ohm" as a family name reportedly comes from the early German for "Uncle",
so atmittance could admittedly have been called "Tante" for the same reason.

<http://boards.weddingbee.com/topic/can-my-aunt-be-my-moh>

-- 
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.javascript

csiph-web