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

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #24748 > unrolled thread

Re: "i = i|0"

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: "i = i|0" Ike Naar <ike@iceland.freeshell.org> - 2014-06-11 21:09 +0000
    Re: "i = i|0" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2014-06-11 17:37 -0400
      Re: "i = i|0" Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-06-12 00:56 +0200
        Re: "i = i|0" raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2014-06-12 11:41 +0000
          Re: "i = i|0" Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-06-12 14:28 +0200
        Re: "i = i|0" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2014-06-12 08:19 -0400
          Re: "i = i|0" Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-06-12 14:45 +0200
            Re: "i = i|0" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2014-06-12 09:25 -0400
              Re: "i = i|0" raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2014-06-12 14:50 +0000
                Re: "i = i|0" Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-06-12 16:55 +0200
                  Re: "i = i|0" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2014-06-12 11:28 -0700
                    Re: "i = i|0" Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-06-12 20:46 +0200
                    Re: "i = i|0" Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-06-12 20:58 +0200
                      Re: "i = i|0" Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2014-06-12 19:20 +0000
                        Re: "i = i|0" Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-06-12 22:13 +0200
                          Re: "i = i|0" Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2014-06-12 21:15 +0000
                            Re: "i = i|0" Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-06-12 23:59 +0200
                              Re: "i = i|0" Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-06-13 01:10 +0200
                              Re: "i = i|0" Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-06-13 01:52 +0200
                              ECMAScript standards (was: "i = i|0") Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-06-15 12:53 +0200
                            Re: "i = i|0" Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-06-12 17:11 -0500
                              Re: "i = i|0" Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2014-06-12 22:40 +0000
                              Re: "i = i|0" glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-06-12 22:44 +0000
                              Re: "i = i|0" Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-06-13 01:16 +0200
                                Re: "i = i|0" raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2014-06-16 12:55 +0000
                                  Re: "i = i|0" Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-06-16 22:44 +0200
                              Re: "i = i|0" Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2014-06-13 19:16 +0200
                                Re: "i = i|0" Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-06-13 19:21 +0200
                                Re: "i = i|0" Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-06-13 18:24 +0100
                                  Re: "i = i|0" Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2014-06-13 21:25 +0000
              Re: "i = i|0" Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-06-12 17:13 +0200
                Re: "i = i|0" raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2014-06-12 15:20 +0000
                  Re: "i = i|0" Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-06-12 17:32 +0200
                    Re: "i = i|0" Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-06-17 12:30 +0200
                Re: "i = i|0" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2014-06-12 12:17 -0400
                  Re: "i = i|0" Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-06-12 20:01 +0200
                    Re: "i = i|0" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2014-06-12 16:13 -0400
                    Re: "i = i|0" glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-06-12 20:44 +0000
                    Re: "i = i|0" Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2014-06-12 20:59 +0000
                      Re: "i = i|0" Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-06-13 01:22 +0200
                        Re: "i = i|0" Martin Shobe <martin.shobe@yahoo.com> - 2014-06-12 19:48 -0500
                          Re: "i = i|0" "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-06-12 18:32 -0700
                            Re: "i = i|0" Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-06-13 12:12 +0200
                  Re: "i = i|0" John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2014-06-13 10:16 +0100
                    Re: "i = i|0" Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-06-13 11:44 +0100
            Re: "i = i|0" "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2014-06-12 15:06 +0100
              Re: "i = i|0" Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-06-12 16:54 +0200

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#24793

On 12-Jun-14 16:15, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> In their feverish zeal to have a famous "Script" language named
> after their god-forsaken organization, the Eurotards responsible for
> this farce clearly didn't pause for a second to think a little bit.

ITYM "in their rush to take Microsoft's money in return for helping to
extract them from their Java trademark infringement suit ..."

Does ECMA do _anything_ useful, or are they just another puppet of Intel
and/or Microsoft?  I'd never heard of them prior to the ECMAScript
nonsense, and I've never heard of them since.

S


-- 
Stephen Sprunk         "God does not play dice."  --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723         "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS        dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking

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

#24795

On Thu, 12 Jun 2014 17:11:04 -0500, Stephen Sprunk wrote:

> Does ECMA do _anything_ useful

They gave tpel a dead horse and a whip once.

-- 
Denis McMahon, denismfmcmahon@gmail.com

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

#24796

In comp.lang.c Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote:

(snip)

> Does ECMA do _anything_ useful, or are they just another puppet of Intel
> and/or Microsoft?  I'd never heard of them prior to the ECMAScript
> nonsense, and I've never heard of them since.

You can also get free copies of many other standards that are
expensive the normal way. I believe I first found out about
them looking for QIC (quarter inch tape) standards.

(I don't remember that QIC was expensive, though.)

-- glen

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

#24798

Stephen Sprunk wrote:

> On 12-Jun-14 16:15, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>> In their feverish zeal to have a famous "Script" language named
>> after their god-forsaken organization, the Eurotards responsible for
>> this farce clearly didn't pause for a second to think a little bit.
> 
> ITYM "in their rush to take Microsoft's money in return for helping to
> extract them from their Java trademark infringement suit ..."

Nonsense.
 
> Does ECMA do _anything_ useful, or are they just another puppet of Intel
> and/or Microsoft?  I'd never heard of them prior to the ECMAScript
> nonsense, and I've never heard of them since.

If you would really be interested in what Ecma International (*that* is the 
*real* name of the organization) did and does, you would visit their Web 
site and find out.  Of course, it is easier for you to troll Usenet.  FOAD.

-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

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

#24888

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

> If you would really be interested in what Ecma International (*that* is the 
> *real* name of the organization) did and does, you would visit their Web 
> site and find out.  Of course, it is easier for you to troll Usenet.  FOAD.

Troll... a word you seem to know well.

If one good thing has come from this thread, it is that I am now even
more grateful that in the browsers I use, I can and by default do turn
JavaScript _off_.

Richard

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

#24891

Richard Bos wrote:

> Troll... a word you seem to know well.

Only too well.  After 14 years of participating in Usenet, I have had to be 
exposed to several such destructive individuals.  Many have come and gone.  
After a while, one develops a sixth sense for them, and filters them out of 
one’s life in advance (for example, obvious address munging, excessive 
crosspost, and postings originating from news servers where people do not 
have to register).

That sense is also alerting me in your case, which is why your provocations 
will not be successful.  So if that is the only thing you are looking for 
here, you can just silently go away as well.  There is no offense where none 
is taken.

If instead you want to learn, you would be well-advised to adjust your 
behavior before more of the knowledgable people adjust their 
scorefiles/killfiles against you.

> If one good thing has come from this thread, it is that I am now even
> more grateful that in the browsers I use, I can and by default do turn
> JavaScript _off_.

Of course you can turn client-side script *support* off (it would not have 
to be *JavaScript* support, BTW).  This is a newsgroup.  Is that supposed to 
be news from you?

But since you need scripting for the client-side DOM, I think that these 
days it will be a pretty dull Web experience without that support, even 
though you can do many things with plain CSS now that you could only do with 
scripting a few year ago, and in my opinion a Web site basically must work 
even without that support.  For example, think about the considerable 
increase in user experience that XHR (misnamed ”AJAX”) is bringing, allowing 
to load content without loading a whole document.  Try and see.

As an interesting fact, what you turn off then is only the client-side 
script support for Web sites.  Several Web browsers where you can turn off 
client-side scripting are based on client-side ECMAScript-based scripting, 
for example Firefox and Chrome/Chromium (both core code and useful 
extensions).  Web sites use technologies like node.js, server-side 
ECMAScript-based scripting (node.js using Google V8 JavaScript).  JSON has 
become the preferred data interchange format.  mongoDB is a popular NoSQL 
database that relies on an ECMAScript implementation for queries and on JSON 
for storage.  And so on.

So it is not only illogical of you to turn off scripting by default in order 
to hurt (someone in) the scripting community (as in most cases you are 
hurting yourself instead), it is actually pointless.

-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

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

#24822

Am 13.06.2014 00:11, schrieb Stephen Sprunk:

> Does ECMA do _anything_ useful, or are they just another puppet of Intel
> and/or Microsoft?  I'd never heard of them prior to the ECMAScript
> nonsense, and I've never heard of them since.

No, not at all. ECMA is not dependent on Microsoft or Intel. To give you 
a brief idea what ECMA is: It is approximately for Europe what ANSI is 
for America: A European standardization organization. ANSI is part of 
ISO (same as DIN in Germany), though ECMA is independent of the ISO 
family of organizations. It would probably be closer to say ECMA is 
something like ITU (telecommunications, former CCITT) for Europe. 
Similar to ISO and ITU, and IEC, ECMA is hosted in Geneva.

So long,
	Thomas

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

#24823

Thomas Richter wrote:

> Am 13.06.2014 00:11, schrieb Stephen Sprunk: 
>> Does ECMA do _anything_ useful, or are they just another puppet of Intel
>> and/or Microsoft?  I'd never heard of them prior to the ECMAScript
>> nonsense, and I've never heard of them since.
> 
> No, not at all. ECMA is not dependent on Microsoft or Intel.

That much is true.

> To give you a brief idea what ECMA is: It is approximately for Europe what
> ANSI is for America: A European standardization organization.

The name is Ecma International for a reason.

First research, then post.

And stop cross-posting.

-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

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

#24824

In article <lnfbkv$gsg$1@news2.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de>, Thomas
Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> wrote:

> Am 13.06.2014 00:11, schrieb Stephen Sprunk:
> 
> > Does ECMA do _anything_ useful, or are they just another puppet of Intel
> > and/or Microsoft?  I'd never heard of them prior to the ECMAScript
> > nonsense, and I've never heard of them since.
> 
> No, not at all. ECMA is not dependent on Microsoft or Intel. To give you 
> a brief idea what ECMA is: It is approximately for Europe what ANSI is 
> for America: A European standardization organization. ANSI is part of 
> ISO (same as DIN in Germany), though ECMA is independent of the ISO 
> family of organizations. It would probably be closer to say ECMA is 
> something like ITU (telecommunications, former CCITT) for Europe. 
> Similar to ISO and ITU, and IEC, ECMA is hosted in Geneva.

AIUI, it stands for European Computer Manufacturers Association.

-- 
"If you're not able to ask questions and deal with the answers without feeling 
that someone has called your intelligence or competence into question, don't 
ask questions on Usenet where the answers won't be carefully tailored to avoid
tripping your hair-trigger insecurities."                  - D M Procida, UCSM

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

#24830

On 2014-06-13, Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> AIUI, it stands for European Computer Manufacturers Association.

Ah, you would think so, but these wankers were jealous of how ISO
is not supposed to be an acronym but just "eye so", and actually
stands for "International Organization for Standardization" or something like
that.

So they renamed themselves to Ecma, which is no longer an acronym, but just "ek
mah".

But "ISO" is actaully clever because it corresponds to the "iso-" Greek
prefix, and standardization ensures "sameness" in some sense.

Whereas Ecma just reminds the reader of "eczema".

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

#24776

James Kuyper wrote:

> On 06/12/2014 08:45 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> [F'up2 comp.lang.javascript]
> 
> Noted, and ignored. Explanation in last paragraph.

Noted, and rejected.  We are _not_ discussing C anymore.
 
>> James Kuyper wrote in comp.lang.c:
> ...
>>> The [0] seems to be intended as a cross-reference, but I couldn't locate
>>> it.
>> 
>> It was in my signature; the URI still is.
> 
> I've found it, but I don't think it was reasonable to have expected
> someone to be able to find it there, without more of a clue about where
> to look. I routinely ignore signatures, I suspect that this is
> commonplace. My newsreader, like many, displays signatures in ways
> designed to avoid drawing attention to them. Specifically, it displays
> them in light grey text on a white background.

Noted.
 
> The corresponding link brings up a blank screen on my system,

Thanks for pointing it out.  Apparently for some reason I have exhausted the 
available memory (a migration to a new server was planned, this could be the 
reason).  Try again later or use a Web cache.  The Matrix has been online 
for some time now.

> so I'm still not sure what the cross-reference was intended to convey.

There is no programming language called ”javascript”, and from that 
everything else follows.  STFW.

> From your comments earlier, I assume it's something about the case.

It is not just about the case, and I wonder which of my comments could have 
mislead you to that assumption.

> Is Javascript better?

No.

> Or should it be JavaScript?

Only if an ECMAScript implementation of that name is meant.  Since there are 
now several such ones that differ considerably (I count three major ones; 
the fourth name is just marketing), I would prefix them with the vendor name 
or engine codename to avoid the ambiguity.

-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

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

#24777

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

> James Kuyper wrote:
> 
> > The corresponding link brings up a blank screen on my system,
> 
> Thanks for pointing it out.  Apparently for some reason I have exhausted the 
> available memory (a migration to a new server was planned, this could be the 
> reason).  Try again later or use a Web cache.  The Matrix has been online 
> for some time now.

If you used proper HTML instead of Too Much EcmaScript(tm), you wouldn't
have that problem.

HTH; HAND.

Richard

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

#24778

Richard Bos wrote:

> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
>> James Kuyper wrote:
>> > The corresponding link brings up a blank screen on my system,
>> 
>> Thanks for pointing it out.  Apparently for some reason I have exhausted
>> the available memory (a migration to a new server was planned, this could
>> be the reason).  Try again later or use a Web cache.  The Matrix has been
>> online for some time now.
> 
> If you used proper HTML instead of Too Much EcmaScript(tm), you wouldn't
> have that problem.

The Matrix is generated server-side with PHP which generates both HTML and 
ECMAScript code (the latter for running the test cases and a little bit of 
UI tweaking).

The reason I have exhausted the allocated memory is that "too many" people 
were kind enough to submit their test results (thank you all), so that the 
results table has become too large for a single PDOStatement::fetchAll().
I have asked the hoster to increase the value; if they cannot do that, I 
will have to find another way.  The simplest solution would be to throw away 
some results, but I try to avoid that.
 
> HTH; HAND.

You have no clue, and you have nothing constructive to say.  Why don't you 
just FOAD?

Score adjusted

-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

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

#24894

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

> The Matrix is generated server-side with PHP which generates both HTML and
> ECMAScript code (the latter for running the test cases and a little bit of
> UI tweaking).
> 
> The reason I have exhausted the allocated memory is that "too many" people
> were kind enough to submit their test results (thank you all), so that the
> results table has become too large for a single PDOStatement::fetchAll().
> I have asked the hoster to increase the value; if they cannot do that, I
> will have to find another way.  The simplest solution would be to throw
> away some results, but I try to avoid that.

Back online.  I have just found a simple and safe solution that allows me to 
keep all results (although I still have to find an easier way to assign 
versions of implementations to runtime environments; hence the *displayed* 
results are not yet up-to-date with regard to all your submissions, sorry).

<http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/es-matrix/branches/live/application/models/mappers/ResultMapper.php?op=diff&rev=255&peg=242>

Keep ’em coming! ;-)
  
-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

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

#24779

On 06/12/2014 11:13 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> James Kuyper wrote:
> 
>> On 06/12/2014 08:45 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>> [F'up2 comp.lang.javascript]
>>
>> Noted, and ignored. Explanation in last paragraph.
> 
> Noted, and rejected.  We are _not_ discussing C anymore.\

Where does this "We" come from? You are, of course, free to discuss
anything you wish. I, however, am still discussing the accuracy of the
connection between the original C code and the JavaScript produced by
Emscripten, a topic for which comp.lang.c is still an appropriate
cross-reference. The minute that this thread ceases to have a valid C
connection, I will also lose interest in it.

...
>> so I'm still not sure what the cross-reference was intended to convey.
> 
> There is no programming language called ”javascript”, and from that 
> everything else follows.  STFW.

I did indeed search the Web. The Wikipedia page for JavaScript says
"JavaScript (JS) is a dynamic computer programming language". so you'll
have to forgive me for thinking that there might be some truth in that
statement.

There's nothing unusual about Wikipedia being incorrect - but if so,
would you or anyone else who cares about the issue care to correct that
article? If so, how would you correct it?

>> From your comments earlier, I assume it's something about the case.
> 
> It is not just about the case, and I wonder which of my comments could have 
> mislead you to that assumption.

"... newsgroup name is case-insensitive ... You would not talk about “c”
either, ..."

That's not enough evidence to prove anything, but you were being too coy
to explain what you actually meant, so I was left with having to guess
what you were talking about based upon the limited amount of available
evidence.

...
>> Or should it be JavaScript?
> 
> Only if an ECMAScript implementation of that name is meant.  Since there are 
> now several such ones that differ considerably (I count three major ones; 
> the fourth name is just marketing), I would prefix them with the vendor name 
> or engine codename to avoid the ambiguity.

The Wikipedia page for JavaScript says that "JavaScript was formalized
in the ECMAScript language standard ...", which seem to imply that
JavaScript and ECMAScript are both valid terms, possibly referring to
subtly different things.

The OP called it JavaScript, without any prefix. He was talking about
Emscripten. The Emscripten web page
<https://github.com/kripken/emscripten/wiki> also calls what it produces
JavaScript, without any prefix. I don't think I'm competent to judge
whether or not it would be correct to take what they said about
"JavaScript", and treat it as if were an an equivalent statement about
"ECMAScript". Can you confirm that such a conversion would be correct? I
certainly have no basis on which to choose a vendor name to use as a
prefix. Would you care to identify the appropriate vendor?

Do the differences between those different versions of ECMAScript affect
the validity of Emscripten's translation of this C code? If so, how? If
not, there's no point in worrying about which one is being referred to.

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

#24781

[F'up2 comp.lang.javascript]

James Kuyper wrote in comp.lang.c:

> On 06/12/2014 11:13 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> James Kuyper wrote:
>>> On 06/12/2014 08:45 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>>> [F'up2 comp.lang.javascript]
>>> Noted, and ignored. Explanation in last paragraph.
>> 
>> Noted, and rejected.  We are _not_ discussing C anymore.\
> 
> Where does this "We" come from? You are, of course, free to discuss
> anything you wish. I, however, am still discussing the accuracy of the
> connection between the original C code and the JavaScript produced by
> Emscripten, a topic for which comp.lang.c is still an appropriate
> cross-reference. The minute that this thread ceases to have a valid C
> connection, I will also lose interest in it.

Please point out the word or paragraph in your posting that contains or 
refers to C code.  If you reasonably cannot, you should reconsider.

> ...
>>> so I'm still not sure what the cross-reference was intended to convey.
>> There is no programming language called ”javascript”, and from that
>> everything else follows.  STFW.
> 
> I did indeed search the Web. The Wikipedia page for JavaScript says
> "JavaScript (JS) is a dynamic computer programming language". so you'll
> have to forgive me for thinking that there might be some truth in that
> statement.

First one has to define what “dynamic programming language” means.
 
> There's nothing unusual about Wikipedia being incorrect - but if so,
> would you or anyone else who cares about the issue care to correct that
> article? If so, how would you correct it?

I would, and I have a long time ago.  I am not convinced that further 
editing would be worthwhile.  The misconception of a single language appears 
to be cemented too deeply into the thinking of the general public.  Not just 
this article, all related lemmata on Wikipedia need a clean-up.  But I am 
going to edit it again if and when I find the time.
 
>>> From your comments earlier, I assume it's something about the case.
>> It is not just about the case, and I wonder which of my comments could
>> have mislead you to that assumption.
> 
> "... newsgroup name is case-insensitive ... You would not talk about “c”
> either, ..."

That refers to the fact that you cannot infer from the newsgroup name the 
spelling of the language (or the topics in the newsgroup, which actually is 
a standard and several programming languages based on it, along with host-
defined APIs like the DOM that are *not* part of any implementation of the 
standard).
 
> That's not enough evidence to prove anything, but you were being too coy
> to explain what you actually meant, so I was left with having to guess
> what you were talking about based upon the limited amount of available
> evidence.

I had not expected the ECMAScript Support Matrix to malfunction this way; 
IIRC it had worked yesterday.  I also had not expected that you would not 
research the newsgroup and the Web more thoroughly before you posted.  I 
prefer to not repeat myself.  Have you tried a Web cache yet?  If not, why 
not?
 
> ...
>>> Or should it be JavaScript?
>> 
>> Only if an ECMAScript implementation of that name is meant.  Since there
>> are now several such ones that differ considerably (I count three major
>> ones; the fourth name is just marketing), I would prefix them with the
>> vendor name or engine codename to avoid the ambiguity.
> 
> The Wikipedia page for JavaScript says that "JavaScript was formalized
> in the ECMAScript language standard ...", which seem to imply that
> JavaScript and ECMAScript are both valid terms, possibly referring to
> subtly different things.

The Wikipedia article is wrong there, too.  The first Edition of ECMAScript 
formalized common features of Netscape JavaScript 1.1 (released 1996-08 with 
Netscape 3.0) and Microsoft’s extended copycat of Netscape JavaScript 1.0 
that they called JScript 1.0 (released 1996-08 with Internet Explorer 3.0).  
The Specification text itself confirms that (any Edition).
 
> The OP called it JavaScript, without any prefix.

Which begs the question which “JavaScript” they are talking about.  It is 
instead very likely that they have no clue which language(s) they are 
talking about.

> He was talking about Emscripten. The Emscripten web page
> <https://github.com/kripken/emscripten/wiki> also calls what it produces
> JavaScript, without any prefix.

Most people do not know what they are talking about, doubly so on this 
topic.

> I don't think I'm competent to judge whether or not it would be correct to
> take what they said about "JavaScript", and treat it as if were an an
> equivalent statement about "ECMAScript". Can you confirm that such a
> conversion would be correct?

It would not.  ECMAScript is the standard; “JavaScript” is contained in the 
name of some implementations of it (borrowing from the original).  The 
standard is very lenient, therefore its implementations can and do differ 
greatly if you know where to look.

> I certainly have no basis on which to choose a vendor name to use as a
> prefix. Would you care to identify the appropriate vendor?

Of the ECMAScript implementations that I would consider “major”, there are 
Netscape/Mozilla JavaScript, Google V8 JavaScript and KDE JavaScript that 
contain the “JavaScript” name standalone.  The original JavaScript, of 
course, is Netscape JavaScript, with Mozilla JavaScript as its open-source 
free-software successor (at least those parts that are licensed under MPL 
2.0 or later).  “Internet Explorer JavaScript” is just a Micro$~1 marketing 
scam; its real name is Microsoft JScript 9+ (codename “Chakra”), supported 
by MSHTML 9+.
 
> Do the differences between those different versions of ECMAScript affect
> the validity of Emscripten's translation of this C code?  If so, how? 

There are no versions of ECMAScript.  There is the ECMAScript Language 
Specification, there are Editions of it, and implementations of those.  I do 
not know which syntactic features of which Edition of ECMAScript Emscripten 
employs, and I suspect code analysis would take long.  I am not aware of any 
differences in the implementation of the “|” operator that we discussed 
here; however, I understand now that the code it generates has little to do 
with the actual statements that are being executed (like, “|0” being just a 
type marker for asm.js aso.)

Insofar there is doubt whether Emscripten/asm.js would be on-topic here in 
the first place (the same as, e.g., there was resistance discussing 
CoffeeScript here).

> If not, there's no point in worrying about which one is being referred to.

Wrong.  The used implementation is defined by the runtime environment.

-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

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

#24788

On 06/12/2014 02:01 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> [F'up2 comp.lang.javascript]
> 
> James Kuyper wrote in comp.lang.c:
...
>> Where does this "We" come from? You are, of course, free to discuss
>> anything you wish. I, however, am still discussing the accuracy of the
>> connection between the original C code and the JavaScript produced by
>> Emscripten, a topic for which comp.lang.c is still an appropriate
>> cross-reference. The minute that this thread ceases to have a valid C
>> connection, I will also lose interest in it.
> 
> Please point out the word or paragraph in your posting that contains or 
> refers to C code.  If you reasonably cannot, you should reconsider.

I can point out two such paragraphs:

> The OP called it JavaScript, without any prefix. He was talking about
> Emscripten. The Emscripten web page
> <https://github.com/kripken/emscripten/wiki> also calls what it produces
> JavaScript, without any prefix. I don't think I'm competent to judge
> whether or not it would be correct to take what they said about
> "JavaScript", and treat it as if were an an equivalent statement about
> "ECMAScript". Can you confirm that such a conversion would be correct?

"What they said about JavaScript" refers to comments about the
translation of C code to JavaScript, and is therefore indirectly a
comment about C code. You might object to the indirect nature of that
reference, but it is not possible to answer my question without reading
those comments, understanding the C code contained in those comments,
and being able to comment on how well that C code was translated.

The following, however, is much more directly about C code - it says so
explicitly:

> "Do the differences between those different versions of ECMAScript affect the validity of Emscripten's translation of this C code?"

And it is precisely those two paragraphs that are the primary reason for
my message; the rest of the message was just about me responding to your
quibbles.

...
>> I did indeed search the Web. The Wikipedia page for JavaScript says
>> "JavaScript (JS) is a dynamic computer programming language". so you'll
>> have to forgive me for thinking that there might be some truth in that
>> statement.
> 
> First one has to define what “dynamic programming language” means.

No, actually, I don't. Nothing that I wrote depends for it's correctness
on the precise definition used for the term "programming language". If
you would prefer that I refer to "JavaScript" as an "oompa-loompa"
rather than a "programming language", feel free to read what I've said
with that term used in place of "programming language" - the change
won't affect any of the points I was actually talking about.

...
>> There's nothing unusual about Wikipedia being incorrect - but if so,
>> would you or anyone else who cares about the issue care to correct that
>> article? If so, how would you correct it?
> 
> I would, and I have a long time ago.  I am not convinced that further 
> editing would be worthwhile.  The misconception of a single language appears 
> to be cemented too deeply into the thinking of the general public.

I would not infer that JavaScript is a single language from that
description - I don't know of any computer language that remained
"single" for any significant length of time. Every language I'm familiar
with has been distributed by different vendors, and has gone through
multiple versions from most of those vendors. There may be some
single-vendor languages which have only ever had one release, but I'm
not familiar with any of them.

Very early in my career I was offered a position that would have
required me to learn a language that was only used by that particular
company, and was never intended to be more widely distributed. I turned
down that position, so it doesn't count as a language that I'm familiar
with - but I also doubt that it had only a single release.

>>>> From your comments earlier, I assume it's something about the case.
>>> It is not just about the case, and I wonder which of my comments could
>>> have mislead you to that assumption.
>>
>> "... newsgroup name is case-insensitive ... You would not talk about “c”
>> either, ..."
> 
> That refers to the fact that you cannot infer from the newsgroup name the 
> spelling of the language

Odd - most of the newsgroups that I'm familiar with that are devoted to
a particular computer programming language do in fact have names that
provide evidence from which you can infer the spelling (other than case)
of the language's name.

> I had not expected the ECMAScript Support Matrix to malfunction this way; 
> IIRC it had worked yesterday.  I also had not expected that you would not 
> research the newsgroup and the Web more thoroughly before you posted.

I didn't choose the newsgroup; I was responding to a message
cross-posted to that group. It's the OP's responsibility, not mine, to
investigate that newsgroup before cross-posting to it. To me, his
decision to cross-post to comp.lang.javascript still seems quite
reasonable - except for the fact that it had the consequence of bringing
you into this discussion.

>  I 
> prefer to not repeat myself.  Have you tried a Web cache yet?  If not, why 
> not?

I had thought you had already (finally!) explained yourself, in the very
same message where you mentioned using a Web cache, so there didn't seem
any point in checking out your web site. It still displays as a blank page.

...
>> The OP called it JavaScript, without any prefix.
> 
> Which begs the question which “JavaScript” they are talking about. ...

It doesn't "beg" the question. That is precisely the question I was
asking you down below. These comments are part of the background for
that question.

>> He was talking about Emscripten. The Emscripten web page
>> <https://github.com/kripken/emscripten/wiki> also calls what it produces
>> JavaScript, without any prefix.
...
>> I don't think I'm competent to judge whether or not it would be correct to
>> take what they said about "JavaScript", and treat it as if were an an
>> equivalent statement about "ECMAScript". Can you confirm that such a
>> conversion would be correct?
...
>> I certainly have no basis on which to choose a vendor name to use as a
>> prefix. Would you care to identify the appropriate vendor?
> 
> Of the ECMAScript implementations that I would consider “major”, ...

This isn't about the "major"ness of the vendor - it's about the
correctness of the statements made by the OP and the Emscripten web
site. Do you know which vendor's names could be inserted into those
statements as a prefix before "JavaScript", in order to make them
correct? Do you know which names would render them incorrect? Unless you
know of some names that would fall into each category, there doesn't
seem to be any point in criticizing them for failing to specify the
vendor. And there's certainly no point in criticizing me for failing to
insert the vendor name that they failed to insert in the comments I was
responding to.

>> Do the differences between those different versions of ECMAScript affect
>> the validity of Emscripten's translation of this C code?  If so, how? 
> There are no versions of ECMAScript.  There is the ECMAScript Language 
> Specification, there are Editions of it, and implementations of those.
...

Your "response" just quibbled about my use of the term "version",
without actually answering the question. To address that quibble, in
light of your response, replace "versions of ECMAScript" with
"implementations of different Editions of ECMAScript".

>> If not, there's no point in worrying about which one is being referred to.
> 
> Wrong.  The used implementation is defined by the runtime environment.

We only get to that "if not" clause if the you claim that the "if so"
clause doesn't apply. You didn't actually answer that question, so I
don't know whether you're claiming that "if so" or "if not" is the
relevant clause.

If you are claiming that "if not" is the relevant clause, I don't see
why the statement you've made is relevant to your conclusion that what I
said is wrong. If "the differences between the different implementations
of the different Editions of ECMAScript" do not "affect the validity of
Emscripten's translation of the C code", and the validity of that
translation is the sole question being raised, why would it matter that
"The used implementation is defined by the runtime environment."? That
comment just seems like a non-sequitur.

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

#24789

In comp.lang.c Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

(snip)

> First one has to define what ???dynamic programming language??? means.

It turns out not what I thought the first time I heard the term,
it is NOT a language in which to write dynamic programming
algorithms.  (I wonder what one of those would be called.)

-- glen

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

#24790

On 2014-06-12, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
>> I did indeed search the Web. The Wikipedia page for JavaScript says
>> "JavaScript (JS) is a dynamic computer programming language". so you'll
>> have to forgive me for thinking that there might be some truth in that
>> statement.
>
> First one has to define what “dynamic programming language” means.

Very easy. A dynamic programming language is characterized by late binding
features. For instance, type is principally a run-time property of
values/objects, rather than of pieces of program source code. Functions and
types may defined and redefined while the program is running.  These
capabilities would be a bare minimum.  Dynamic languages also usually exhibit
introspection: various entities that describe the program, and which disappear
after compile time in static languages tend to be available in a useful
run-time representation in dynamic languages. For instance "class"
or "variable name" might be strictly compile-time concepts in a static
language, but in a dynamic language they might be run-time values of some
sort.

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

#24799

Kaz Kylheku wrote:

> On 2014-06-12, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
>>> I did indeed search the Web. The Wikipedia page for JavaScript says
>>> "JavaScript (JS) is a dynamic computer programming language". so you'll
>>> have to forgive me for thinking that there might be some truth in that
>>> statement.
>>
>> First one has to define what “dynamic programming language” means.
> 
> Very easy. A dynamic programming language is characterized by late binding
> features. For instance, type is principally a run-time property of
> values/objects, rather than of pieces of program source code. Functions
> and types may defined and redefined while the program is running.  These
> capabilities would be a bare minimum.  Dynamic languages also usually
> exhibit introspection: various entities that describe the program, and
> which disappear after compile time in static languages tend to be
> available in a useful run-time representation in dynamic languages. For
> instance "class" or "variable name" might be strictly compile-time
> concepts in a static language, but in a dynamic language they might be
> run-time values of some sort.

That is an interesting definition that you have just made up.  And it does 
not fully apply to JavaScript (or other ECMAScript implementations) either.

-- 
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | SVN: <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
Twitter: @PointedEars2 | ES Matrix: <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

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

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

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

csiph-web