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

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #36784 > unrolled thread

ECMAScript (was: Re: responsive navigator)

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

  ECMAScript (was: Re: responsive navigator) Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-06-05 13:58 +0200
    Re: ECMAScript (was: Re: responsive navigator) Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2019-06-05 20:20 +0000
    Re: ECMAScript John W Kennedy <john.w.kennedy@gmail.com> - 2019-06-06 14:47 -0400
      Re: ECMAScript Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2019-06-06 22:23 +0200

#36784 — ECMAScript (was: Re: responsive navigator)

On 02.06.19 00:37, Lewis wrote:

> In message <2482631.mvXUDI8C0e@PointedEars.de> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
[...]
>> You need to read more carefully.  Writing “javascript” is NOT just about 
>> spelling, it is indicative of a deeper misconception.
> 
> No, it's a stupid pedant being a stupid pedant.

If you don't want to learn about the facts, then just shut up and don't
call others "stupid pedant"!

ECMAScript is the one and only standard and JavaScript, V8, JScript etc.
are just implementations based on that standard.

And those implementations also rely on a runtime environmnet which as
*nothing* to do with a *language*. For example Node.js provides a
completely different set of objects as Firefox or Chrome.

>> F’up2 comp.lang.javascript
> 
> No.

Well it doesn't surprise me, that you don't want to follow up to the
right newsgroup. But I'd recommend going there if you really want to
discuss and learn and not just call everybody a "stupid pedant" because
they know more about the topic than you. Otherwise just ignore this post.

F'Up to comp.lang.javascript.


-- 
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#36795

In message <glpp3hF2toU1@mid.individual.net> Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote:
> On 02.06.19 00:37, Lewis wrote:

>> In message <2482631.mvXUDI8C0e@PointedEars.de> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
> [...]
>>> You need to read more carefully.  Writing “javascript” is NOT just about 
>>> spelling, it is indicative of a deeper misconception.
>> 
>> No, it's a stupid pedant being a stupid pedant.

> If you don't want to learn about the facts, then just shut up and don't
> call others "stupid pedant"!

How about if you want to be an idiot pedant you go elswewhere filled
with idiot pedants and stop bothering me?

Or, but more succintly, fuck off.

> Well it doesn't surprise me, that you don't want to follow up to the
> right newsgroup.

I don't psot to newsgroups I do not follow.

> But I'd recommend going there if you really want to discuss and learn

I have no interest i talking to people like you. You pedantry is the
pedantry of an idiot.

> and not just call everybody a "stupid pedant"

No, just you.

> they know more about the topic than you. Otherwise just ignore this post.

Stop posting.

> F'Up to comp.lang.javascript.

No. And did you notice the name of the fucking newsgroup for the
language you claim doe snot exist? What a fucking cluless git you are.

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

#36815 — Re: ECMAScript

On 6/5/19 7:58 AM, Arno Welzel wrote:
> ECMAScript is the one and only standard and JavaScript, V8, JScript etc.
> are just implementations based on that standard.

Not historically. JavaScript (originally named LiveScript) came first, 
from NetScape. ECMAScript was based on it.

-- 
John W. Kennedy
"The blind rulers of Logres
Nourished the land on a fallacy of rational virtue."
   -- Charles Williams.  "Taliessin through Logres: Prelude"

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

#36818 — Re: ECMAScript

John W Kennedy wrote:

> On 6/5/19 7:58 AM, Arno Welzel wrote:
>> ECMAScript is the one and only standard and JavaScript, V8, JScript etc.
>> are just implementations based on that standard.
> 
> Not historically. JavaScript (originally named LiveScript) came first,
> from NetScape. ECMAScript was based on it.

No, the first edition of ECMAScript (1997 CE) was based on Netscape 
JavaScript 1.1 *and* Microsoft JScript 1.0.

All JavaScripts and JScripts in common use today, at least, are 
implementations of ECMAScript Edition 3 (1999/2000) or later.  (The most 
recent implemented Edition is Edition 9 of 2018.)

See also the “ECMAScript Support Matrix” (URL below).

-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
<https://github.com/PointedEars> | <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | Please do not cc me./Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

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

csiph-web