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

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #19645 > unrolled thread

Javascript: TDG 6th edition

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

Contents

  Javascript: TDG 6th edition Andrew <andrew@invalid.invalid> - 2013-05-06 07:53 -0400
    Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2013-05-06 06:46 -0700
      Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-06 18:10 +0200
        Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Andrew <andrew@invalid.invalid> - 2013-05-07 07:42 -0400
          Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2013-05-07 05:54 -0700
            Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-07 19:48 +0200
              Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2013-05-07 12:53 -0700
                Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-07 22:48 +0200
                  Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2013-05-07 14:02 -0700
                    Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-08 10:11 +0200
                      Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2013-05-09 08:33 -0700
                        Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2013-05-09 16:54 +0100
                          Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2013-05-09 13:02 -0700
                            Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2013-05-09 22:38 +0100
                          Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-05-10 20:03 +0100
                            Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition MC <news@aisus.com> - 2013-05-17 11:04 -0500
                              Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2013-05-18 13:09 +1000
                                Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-18 10:40 +0200
                                  Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-05-18 10:16 +0100
                                    Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2013-05-18 20:14 +1000
                                    Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition MC <news@aisus.com> - 2013-05-18 10:11 -0500
                              Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-05-20 19:58 +0100
                  Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2013-05-07 22:03 +0100
              Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2013-05-07 13:02 -0700
                Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-07 22:50 +0200
                  Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2013-05-07 14:03 -0700
              Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-05-07 21:39 +0100
              Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Cezary Tomczyk <cezary.tomczyk@gmail.com> - 2013-05-08 00:10 -0700
                Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-08 09:51 +0200
              Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Luuk <luuk@invalid.lan> - 2013-05-09 23:36 +0200
            Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition MC <news@aisus.com> - 2013-05-17 08:59 -0500
        Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Joao Rodrigues <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com.br> - 2013-05-21 00:50 -0300
          Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-05-21 12:50 +0200
      Re: Javascript: TDG 6th edition Andrew <andrew@invalid.invalid> - 2013-05-07 07:25 -0400

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#19814

On 5/18/2013 4:16 AM, John Harris wrote:
> On Sat, 18 May 2013 10:40:28 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
> <PointedEars@web.de>  wrote:
>
>> Andrew Poulos wrote:
>
>    <snip>
>>> Why do you guys spend so much of your time discussing what you believe
>>> are flaws in someone else's personality? Is there a Miss Congeniality
>>> prize to be had?
>>
>> I'll give you a hint: When was the last time any of those “characters”
>> posted anything constructive, let alone on-topic here?
>
> I'll give you another hint : when was the last time that Thomas
> admitted that one of his opinions or preferences was not an immutable
> law of nature ?
>
> And another hint : when was the last time that Thomas refrained from
> vilifying someone who did not conform to a Thomas opinion or
> preference ?
>
>    John

Ditto,
Its counter-productive to give an opinion (always presented as fact), 
and text terrorize them. Most of us have been his victims, some more 
than once. I love the help that Jan, David, Scott and others give. But I 
always ~cringe~ when I see a reply with pointy's name on it. His opinion 
is usually very knowledgeable...but he seems to take a perverse pleasure 
in seeing how far he can berate people inline with it.

MC

PS. Jan and David are AWESOME and I am so grateful for the opportunity 
to reach out to them...just dread it at the same time

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

#19845

In comp.lang.javascript message <9e16e$51965490$6214769e$10649@ALLTEL.NE
T>, Fri, 17 May 2013 11:04:37, MC <news@aisus.com> posted:

>On 5/10/2013 2:03 PM, Dr J R Stockton wrote:
>> In comp.lang.javascript message<timstreater-94EA6D.16540009052013@news.
>> individual.net>, Thu, 9 May 2013 16:54:01, Tim Streater
>> <timstreater@greenbee.net>  posted:
>>
>>>
>>> He thinks he is Mozart and we're all Salieri. In fact he's the foolish
>>> emperor and everyone else is a mixture of M and S.
>>>
>>
>> He's more like someone in a fortunately-lost fragment of G&  S.
>>
>> But his existence has given me, since November last, greater pleasure in
>> the morning while looking at the middle of the Court and Social page of
>> the Daily Telegraph.
>>
>
>I looked for a Court and Social section and could not find it online.
>Do you have a link? Maybe its behind a paywall?

Any reputable newsagent will sell the paper to you; any good public
library will subscribe.

-- 
 (c) John Stockton, nr London, UK.   E-mail, see Home Page.    Turnpike v6.05.
 Website  <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - w. FAQish topics, links, acronyms
 PAS EXE etc. : <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/programs/> - see in 00index.htm
 Dates - miscdate.htm estrdate.htm js-dates.htm pas-time.htm critdate.htm etc.

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

#19679

In article <2195068.YSNOXJCL14@PointedEars.de>,
 Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

> Scott Sauyet wrote:
> 
> > Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> >> Scott Sauyet wrote:
> >>> Andrew wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> Thomas is well-known here for extremely pedantic answers.  That he
> >>> also has a lot of useful knowledge only partly compensates for his
> >>> anti-social behavior.
> >>
> >> That is a luser attitude.  There is nothing pedantic or anti-social about
> >> telling people the truth. [ ... ]
> > 
> > Actually, it often is both pedantic and anti-social.  Are you the sort
> > who tells parents your unvarnished opinion of their offspring?
> > 
> > One reasonable definition of "pedantic" (from [1]) is "marked by a
> > narrow focus on or display of learning especially its trivial
> > aspects."  Almost by definition, being pedantic involves telling the
> > truth, or at least what one sees as the truth.  The trouble is that
> > the truth being described is overly concerned with minutiae, sometimes
> > to the detriment of the conversation.
> 
> Unfortunately, apparently it is not trivial that here is no “Javascript”.  
> If it was trivial, probably more people would be able to see the fact, and 
> consider the different and differing ECMAScript implementations that they 
> are actually using.

It's trivially unimportant, that's for sure. Perhaps it's time to tell 
you to fuck off again.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

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

#19673

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> Scott Sauyet wrote:
>> But the link to the cljs faq was simply mistyped:
>
>>     <http://jibbering.com/faq/>
>
> That is not a link, but a URI

Speaking of pedantry...

  -- Scott

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

#19676

Scott Sauyet wrote:

> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Scott Sauyet wrote:
>>> But the link to the cljs faq was simply mistyped:
>>> <http://jibbering.com/faq/>
>>
>> That is not a link, but a URI
> 
> Speaking of pedantry...

Posting to Usenet via Google Groups, i. e. on the Web, where URIs become 
links through the interface, can you even know the difference between link 
and URI?

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

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

#19678

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> Scott Sauyet wrote:
>> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>> Scott Sauyet wrote:
>>>> But the link to the cljs faq was simply mistyped:
>>>> <http://jibbering.com/faq/>
>
>>> That is not a link, but a URI
>
>> Speaking of pedantry...
>
> Posting to Usenet via Google Groups, i. e. on the Web, where URIs become
> links through the interface, can you even know the difference between link
> and URI?

Yes.

  -- Scott

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

#19674

On Tue, 07 May 2013 19:48:06 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
<PointedEars@web.de> wrote:


  <snip>
> Unlike Python, if you want to get serious, you do not 
>learn “Javascript” once and for all; you better learn JavaScript, 
  <snip>

Not long ago Thomas declared that the name "JavaScript" has now become
a generic name. Therefore, by Thomas's well known rule, there is no
such language as JavaScript. Therefore he is totally wrong when he
tells people to learn JavaScript.

Incidentally, I wonder why Thomas hasn't convinced the Mozilla people
that claiming to implement JavaScript is so terribly wrong.

  John

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

#19687

7 may 2013 19:48:06 UTC+2 user Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> Scott Sauyet wrote:
[...]
> > But the link to the cljs faq was simply mistyped:
> >     <http://jibbering.com/faq/>
> 
> That is not a link, but a URI[...]

For me it's a URL. Following by "[...] An http URI is a URL. [...]" (source: http://www.w3.org/TR/uri-clarification/#contemporary)

-- 
Cezary Tomczyk
http://www.ctomczyk.pl/
Temporary posting from Google Groups

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

#19689

Cezary Tomczyk wrote:

> 7 may 2013 19:48:06 UTC+2 user Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Scott Sauyet wrote:
> [...]
>> > But the link to the cljs faq was simply mistyped:
>> >     <http://jibbering.com/faq/>
>> 
>> That is not a link, but a URI[...]
> 
> For me it's a URL. Following by "[...] An http URI is a URL. [...]"
> (source: http://www.w3.org/TR/uri-clarification/#contemporary)

Whereas “contemporary” means “as of 2001“, and:

| Further according to the contemporary view, the term "URL" does not refer
| to a formal partition of URI space; rather, URL is a useful but informal
| concept: […]

It is a matter of opinion if you want to use the more general, standardized 
(RFC 3986), formal term, or the more specific, informal concept.  It is 
_not_ a matter of opinion if, out of ignorance, you confuse a concept 
([hyper]link) with the means by which it can be realized (URI/URL) in 
specific media (Web).

A NetNews posting is *plain text*; it cannot contain hyperlinks, but it can 
contain URIs/URLs.  It is only the viewing software that might create a link 
from a URI/URL, or it might not.  Ignoring that difference is ignoring that 
Web archives/interfaces like Google Groups do not represent the original, 
intended way of using NetNews, and therefore fall short of making full use 
of its features (bugs in GG aside).

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

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

#19726

On 07-05-2013 19:48, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> That is a luser attitude.  There is nothing pedantic or anti-social about
> telling people the truth.  There *really* is no “Javascript” .........

from http://pointedears.de/scripts/test/es-matrix/:
[quoot]
In fact, there is no “javascript”; there is JavaScript.
[/quoot]


Can you explain?

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

#19771

On 5/7/2013 7:54 AM, Scott Sauyet wrote:
> Andrew wrote:
>> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>> Scott Sauyet wrote:
>>>> Andrew wrote:
>>>>> Is there an online reference of reasonable quality, similar to the
>>>>> documentation for Python? (I'm guessing no, but would like to be wrong)
>>
>>>> I don't really know the Python documentation, but there is definitely
>>>> not one definitive source of API documentation,
>>
>>> The reason of which is that, AFAIK by contrast to Python, there is no
>>> ´Javascript¡.  I am still amazed how some people can still manage to ignore
>>> that basic fact.
>>
>> I was aware of the distinction, but given that "Javascript" is in both the
>> name of the group and the name of the book I was inquiring about, being
>> pedantic about it seemed like it would distract from the question I wanted
>> to ask.
>
> Thomas is well-known here for extremely pedantic answers.  That he
> also has a lot of useful knowledge only partly compensates for his
> anti-social behavior.
>
>
>>> Links to reference material other than books can be found in the FAQs for
>>> this newsgroup. [2]  In fact, books are the resources that are the least
>>> recommended there for good reasons.
>>
>> The (apparently wrong) impression I got from the FAQ was that the online
>> resources listed were all either specifications, bare references, or
>> individual-implementation-specific information. What I wanted was a
>> language guide aimed at experienced programmers new to ECMAScript, and
>> looking to program in a manner that would work cross-browser without
>> unnatural acts.
>>
>> Nothing listed appeared to suit, and I assumed if there was something
>> suitable out there it would be listed; hence I looked to books instead. If
>> you're updating the FAQ, it may be worth being more descriptive in the
>> resource section.
>
> There are in my opinion more books worth consideration than there were
> a few years ago.  As well as the two mentioned in the FAQ (Flanagan's
> _The Definitive Guide_ and Crockford's _The Good Parts_), I would also
> recommend, with some caveats:
>
>      JavaScript Patterns, by Stoyen Stefanov
>      Test-Driven JavaScript, by Christian Johansen
>      High Performance JavaScript, by Nicholas Zakas
>
> and, with very few caveats:
>
>      Eloquent JavaScript, by Marijn Haverbeke
>      Effective JavaScript, by David Herman
>
>>> _______
>>> [1]<http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
>>> [2]<http://PointedEars.de/faq>  contains a maintained, currently only
>>>      slightly modified version of<http://jibbering.com/f;the latter
>>>      is not maintained since 2010.  See the changelog for details.
>>
>> Just FYI, neither of those links works for me. I can ping the site and nmap
>> claims the appropriate ports are open, but attempts from a couple of
>> different browsers in a couple of different locations all hang on Waiting
>> for pointedears.de.
>
> I don't know what's up with Thomas' site.  But the link to the cljs
> faq was simply mistyped:
>
>      <http://jibbering.com/faq/>
>
>    -- Scott

Scott...
Do you think they will classify a disorder in the next book on 
psychological behavior for people that like to ABUSE others in a textual 
Internet setting to make themselves feel superior to others?
Pointy can be example #1

I don't understand why he can't be civil to others as he has a lot of 
knowledge and is almost always on target...but like a bad rash.

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

#19848

On 06/05/2013 13:10, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

> MDN does contain a (Mozilla) _JavaScript_ tutorial, because there are more
> ECMAScript implementations (than JavaScript), and more DOM implementations
> than the Gecko DOM.  For example, the documentation and tutorial for JScript
> and the MSHTML DOM, the programming language and DOM API in Internet
> Explorer-based applications, respectively, can be found in the MSDN Library
> instead.

Interestingly, Microsoft has adopted the name "JavaScript" for their 
ECMAScript 5th edition implementation as of IE 10:
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ie/d1et7k7c(v=vs.94).aspx>

And they are developing a new programming language named "TypeScript". 
Around 50 people are working on it, such as Anders Hejlsberg (the 
creator of the C# language) and many others:
<http://www.zdnet.com/who-built-microsoft-typescript-and-why-7000005206/>


-- 
Joao Rodrigues

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

#19866

Joao Rodrigues wrote:

> On 06/05/2013 13:10, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> MDN does contain a (Mozilla) _JavaScript_ tutorial, because there are
>> more ECMAScript implementations (than JavaScript), and more DOM
>> implementations
>> than the Gecko DOM.  For example, the documentation and tutorial for
>> JScript and the MSHTML DOM, the programming language and DOM API in
>> Internet Explorer-based applications, respectively, can be found in the
>> MSDN Library instead.
> 
> Interestingly, Microsoft has adopted the name "JavaScript" for their
> ECMAScript 5th edition implementation as of IE 10:
> <http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ie/d1et7k7c(v=vs.94).aspx>

I/we here know.  MSDN calls it “JavaScript for Internet Explorer (10)”, but 
ScriptEngine() still says “JScript”; rightly so for the latter, but 
unnecessarily confusing to newcomers as it still is a different programming 
language with syntax not supported by any other implementation.

> And they are developing a new programming language named "TypeScript".
> Around 50 people are working on it, such as Anders Hejlsberg (the
> creator of the C# language) and many others:
> <http://www.zdnet.com/who-built-microsoft-typescript-and-why-7000005206/>

Interesting.

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

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

#19652

On Mon, 6 May 2013 06:46:44 -0700 (PDT), Scott Sauyet wrote:

>> Has anyone read the 6th who is in a position to compare the two? Does it
>> suck less or more? Is there a reason to prefer the older version, perhaps
>> for compatibility? (I note from descriptions that the 6th describes a newer
>> version of the language that may not be universally supported)
> 
> Definitely choose the 6th edition.  It has a number of improvements,
> and much new material. 

Thanks. I appreciate the recommendation. 

>> Is there an online reference of reasonable quality, similar to the
>> documentation for Python? (I'm guessing no, but would like to be wrong)
> 
> I don't really know the Python documentation, but there is definitely
> not one definitive source of API documentation, but note that the API
> is quite small.  The best reference site might well be MDN [1] but it
> is not a tutorial.

That looks like it might actually be enough for my needs. I noticed the
link in the FAQ but interpreted it as leading to Mozilla-specific reference
documentation rather than a general guide, and so passed over it. 

-- 
Andrew

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

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

csiph-web