Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #38247 > unrolled thread
| Started by | John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2020-03-16 14:34 +0000 |
| Last post | 2020-03-23 18:49 -0700 |
| Articles | 16 on this page of 76 — 12 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.javascript
Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-16 14:34 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> - 2020-03-16 14:52 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-16 18:19 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> - 2020-03-16 20:06 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-17 19:01 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) Jon Ribbens <jon+usenet@unequivocal.eu> - 2020-03-17 19:55 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-18 17:29 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) JJ <jj4public@vfemail.net> - 2020-03-17 12:48 +0700
Re: Object values (continued) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2020-03-17 17:51 +0100
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-17 19:03 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2020-03-18 07:20 +1100
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-18 17:29 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2020-03-19 14:21 +1100
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-19 11:12 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2020-03-20 14:33 +1100
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-20 09:21 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2020-03-21 09:56 +1100
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-21 11:18 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2020-03-22 08:45 +1100
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-22 10:10 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2020-03-23 07:44 +1100
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-17 19:09 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2020-03-17 16:21 -0400
Re: Object values (continued) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2020-03-17 22:57 +0100
Re: Object values (continued) Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2020-03-19 05:32 -0700
Re: Object values (continued) Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2020-03-19 15:26 +0100
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-19 18:16 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-19 18:15 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2020-03-19 11:54 -0700
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-20 09:11 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-27 15:35 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2020-03-27 09:59 -0700
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-28 14:09 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2020-03-29 14:18 +1100
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-29 10:40 +0100
Re: Object values (continued) Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2020-03-29 04:41 -0700
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-21 14:12 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2020-03-21 19:45 +0100
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-22 10:30 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2020-03-22 23:30 +0100
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-23 09:44 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2020-03-23 11:19 +0100
Re: Object values (continued) Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2020-03-23 05:00 -0700
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-23 18:05 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2020-03-23 11:50 -0700
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-23 19:34 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-23 18:14 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2020-03-23 22:21 +0100
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-24 14:09 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2020-03-25 00:01 +0100
Re: Object values (continued) Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2020-03-24 01:18 +0100
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-24 14:24 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2020-03-24 15:43 +0100
Re: Object values (continued) Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2020-03-24 11:03 -0700
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-24 18:23 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2020-03-24 22:19 +0100
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-25 16:34 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2020-03-25 23:17 +0100
Re: Object values (continued) Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2020-03-26 01:27 +0100
Re: Object values (continued) Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2020-03-26 18:58 +1100
Re: Object values (continued) Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2020-03-26 10:43 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2020-03-26 12:22 +0100
Re: Object values (continued) "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2020-03-26 10:08 -0700
Re: Object values (continued) Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2020-03-26 18:29 +0100
Re: Object values (continued) "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2020-03-26 14:17 -0700
Re: Object values (continued) Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2020-03-26 23:37 +0100
Re: Object values (continued) "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2020-03-26 16:40 -0700
Re: Object values (continued) Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2020-03-27 11:38 +0100
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-26 18:11 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2020-03-26 19:41 +0100
Re: Object values (continued) "Mark-" <nospam@mapson.xyz> - 2020-03-25 00:00 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-25 15:05 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) "Mark-" <nospam@mapson.xyz> - 2020-03-25 20:12 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-26 18:09 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2020-03-25 19:39 +0000
Re: Object values (continued) "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2020-03-23 18:49 -0700
Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-03-26 10:43 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Object values (continued) |
| Message-ID | <878sjnz99j.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #38325 |
Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> writes: > On 26/03/2020 11:27 am, Silvio wrote: >> On 3/25/20 5:34 PM, John G Harris wrote: >>> >>> Anyone who believes what I said about call_by_reference can safely >>> ignore the rest of this article. > > Is there anyone left that doesn't believe Harris is very busy > polishing a turd? Yes. -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Silvio <silvio@internet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-03-26 12:22 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Object values (continued) |
| Message-ID | <5e7c9085$0$3995$e4fe514c@newszilla.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #38325 |
On 3/26/20 8:58 AM, Andrew Poulos wrote: > > Haven't you worked out by now that Harris is either trolling or > polishing a turd? > > Andrew Poulos Perhaps, but even then I think it is important to correct wrongs if only to not misinform other readers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-03-26 10:08 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Object values (continued) |
| Message-ID | <640f078f-d340-40fa-9f18-6220254a593c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #38327 |
On Thursday, March 26, 2020 at 6:22:53 AM UTC-5, Silvio wrote: > On 3/26/20 8:58 AM, Andrew Poulos wrote: > > > > Haven't you worked out by now that Harris is either trolling or > > polishing a turd? > > > > Andrew Poulos > > Perhaps, but even then I think it is important to correct wrongs if only > to not misinform other readers. Dmitry Soshnikov has has written competently on this topic: <https://web.archive.org/web/20200113114611/http://dmitrysoshnikov.com/ecmascript/chapter-8-evaluation-strategy/>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Silvio <silvio@internet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-03-26 18:29 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Object values (continued) |
| Message-ID | <5e7ce660$0$18301$e4fe514c@newszilla.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #38328 |
On 3/26/20 6:08 PM, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote: > Dmitry Soshnikov Hardly. He makes the same mistake as the Wikipedia article by stating that call-by-sharing is actually a calling mechanism which it is not.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-03-26 14:17 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Object values (continued) |
| Message-ID | <fa00723b-2344-4318-80ff-f26306ec30be@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #38329 |
On Thursday, March 26, 2020 at 12:29:11 PM UTC-5, Silvio wrote: > On 3/26/20 6:08 PM, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote: > > Dmitry Soshnikov > > Hardly. He makes the same mistake as the Wikipedia article by stating > that call-by-sharing is actually a calling mechanism which it is not. A more accurate expression would be that Call-by-Sharing is a Parameter Mode.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Silvio <silvio@internet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-03-26 23:37 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Object values (continued) |
| Message-ID | <5e7d2ea6$0$18280$e4fe514c@newszilla.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #38336 |
On 3/26/20 10:17 PM, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote: > On Thursday, March 26, 2020 at 12:29:11 PM UTC-5, Silvio wrote: >> On 3/26/20 6:08 PM, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote: >>> Dmitry Soshnikov >> >> Hardly. He makes the same mistake as the Wikipedia article by stating >> that call-by-sharing is actually a calling mechanism which it is not. > > A more accurate expression would be that Call-by-Sharing is a Parameter Mode. > I disagree. It is not a mode at all. It is a mix-up of two separate concepts: call parameter passing and reference types. The former is part of a languages call mechanism while the latter is part of its memory model. The concepts are related but orthogonal.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-03-26 16:40 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Object values (continued) |
| Message-ID | <94c409b8-ea5c-4b44-9d87-64b8d85e2e29@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #38337 |
On Thursday, March 26, 2020 at 5:37:31 PM UTC-5, Silvio wrote: > On 3/26/20 10:17 PM, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote: > > On Thursday, March 26, 2020 at 12:29:11 PM UTC-5, Silvio wrote: > >> On 3/26/20 6:08 PM, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote: > >>> Dmitry Soshnikov > >> > >> Hardly. He makes the same mistake as the Wikipedia article by stating > >> that call-by-sharing is actually a calling mechanism which it is not. > > > > A more accurate expression would be that Call-by-Sharing is a Parameter Mode. > > > > I disagree. It is not a mode at all. It is a mix-up of two separate > concepts: call parameter passing and reference types. The former is part > of a languages call mechanism while the latter is part of its memory > model. The concepts are related but orthogonal. You're inconsistent with the definition given in The Dragon Book and Programming Language Pragmatics by Michael Scott. Is there another authoritative reference you're using?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Silvio <silvio@internet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-03-27 11:38 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Object values (continued) |
| Message-ID | <5e7dd7a5$0$9132$e4fe514c@newszilla.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #38338 |
On 3/27/20 12:40 AM, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote: > On Thursday, March 26, 2020 at 5:37:31 PM UTC-5, Silvio wrote: >> On 3/26/20 10:17 PM, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote: >>> On Thursday, March 26, 2020 at 12:29:11 PM UTC-5, Silvio wrote: >>>> On 3/26/20 6:08 PM, Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote: >>>>> Dmitry Soshnikov >>>> >>>> Hardly. He makes the same mistake as the Wikipedia article by stating >>>> that call-by-sharing is actually a calling mechanism which it is not. >>> >>> A more accurate expression would be that Call-by-Sharing is a Parameter Mode. >>> >> >> I disagree. It is not a mode at all. It is a mix-up of two separate >> concepts: call parameter passing and reference types. The former is part >> of a languages call mechanism while the latter is part of its memory >> model. The concepts are related but orthogonal. > > You're inconsistent with the definition given in The Dragon Book and Programming Language Pragmatics by Michael Scott. > > Is there another authoritative reference you're using? > Well not exactly. The Dragon Book make no mention of call by sharing nor does it describe any parameter passing mechanism that is similar. A, S & U list call-by-value and call-by-reference along with copy-restore as an alternative way of implementing call-by-reference and Algols call-by-name concept. The first comprehensive formal description of the memory model of a programming language can be found in the Report on the algorithmic language Algol 68 (1969) and subsequently the Revised report .. (1976). Between these two publications Kees Koster (who was in the A68 committee and was my college professor) published a lot about the implementation of programming languages and their compilers during his work on CDL, including his A compiler compiler (1971) and Towards a machine independent Algol 68 translator (1972). The first thorough analysis and description of the implementation of what are now loosely called reference types I came across was Performance and Evaluation of Lisp Systems (1985) by R.P. Gabriel but there must have been others before that since McCarthy defined Lisp as early as 1962. I have a hardcopy of a nameless college workbook (my university used to liberally and without reference to publications or authors copy parts of publications into cheaply glued paperbacks and supply them as "dictates") where a clear distinction is made between value types and variable modes. Numeric values, characters, structures and various kinds of "objects" are called value types where pointers and references (the C++/call-by kind) are deemed variable modes, not to be mistaken for types. I always found that a useful way of looking at things. The Wikipedia article on reference types obviously mixes up reference types with C++ references and even pointers. What else is new.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-03-26 18:11 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Object values (continued) |
| Message-ID | <ivrp7fd686l1cga250cv4oabdf0bse260i@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #38324 |
On Thu, 26 Mar 2020 01:27:55 +0100, Silvio <silvio@internet.com>
wrote:
>On 3/25/20 5:34 PM, John G Harris wrote:
<snip>
>> // Set up
>> int i {19};
>> int & j {i};
<snip>
>The fact that you demonstrate the exact behavior I described shows you
>do not understand me.
>
>I think the misunderstanding stems from terminology. We seem to have
>different interpretations about what a variable and a value is. I use
>the word variable as the mathematical notion of a symbolic name that is
>at some point bound to a certain value.
>In C++ variables are expressed as identifiers. These identifiers are
>static (as in compile time and immutable) names for a memory location.
>Depending on the kind of variable (global, local, class member) that may
>may be a fixed memory address (to be resolved at load time or position
>independent depending on the memory model in use), a stack frame offset
>of a relative memory offset. The type associated with the identifier
>determines how that memory pointed at is interpreted.
>
>The value at the location pointed to is what I call the value associated
>with the identifier (variable).
Yes, I was beginning to think we're discussing two different ways of
viewing the same thing.
It looks like this to me :
I would say 5 is assigned to v (source code view); you would say 5 is
assigned to the storage area allocated by the compiler (executable
code view). While the compiler is running it holds a map that says
which storage area to use for which variable's name in the source
code.
I'm not fond of saying it's bound as in mathematical logic. I prefer
to think of the source code telling the computer what to do, and the
compiler translating it into instructions the computer understands.
>Your int& j points to the same memory location as i does, although j is
>in most cases (unless optimized away by the compiler which is possible
>in some cases) an actual int* that needs an extra indirection to access
>the memory location associated with i.
<snip>
Not exactly. "It is unspecified whether or not a reference requires
storage". On seeing that j is initialised with a variable in the same
scope as j the compiler can map j into the same storage area as i.
Even if all optimising is switched off. And mostly it does.
>But upthread you claimed that call by reference could in some cases even
>lead to assigning a string to an integer variable.
<snip
You misunderstand. I was telling Evertjan what ECMAScript could do if
it had call_by_reference, which it hasn't.
>You brought up pass by reference, which had little or nothing
>to do with reference types.
No I didn't. It was Julio who mentioned it, and may be regretting it,
and Evertjan who said that that's the only by_reference that
ECMAScript has.
John
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Silvio <silvio@internet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-03-26 19:41 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Object values (continued) |
| Message-ID | <5e7cf73d$0$18287$e4fe514c@newszilla.xs4all.nl> |
| In reply to | #38331 |
On 3/26/20 7:11 PM, John G Harris wrote: > > Yes, I was beginning to think we're discussing two different ways of > viewing the same thing. > > It looks like this to me : > I would say 5 is assigned to v (source code view); you would say 5 is > assigned to the storage area allocated by the compiler (executable > code view). While the compiler is running it holds a map that says > which storage area to use for which variable's name in the source > code. > > I'm not fond of saying it's bound as in mathematical logic. I prefer > to think of the source code telling the computer what to do, and the > compiler translating it into instructions the computer understands. > I can live with that. Having a background in compiler development I tend to think in terms of what the compiler translates the source code into. > > Not exactly. "It is unspecified whether or not a reference requires > storage". On seeing that j is initialised with a variable in the same > scope as j the compiler can map j into the same storage area as i. > Even if all optimising is switched off. And mostly it does. > This is what I call an optimization. The compiler can only do this in some cases. And in these cases the references are functionally redundant, except from a case where the compiler is inlining function that has a reference type formal parameter. > >> But upthread you claimed that call by reference could in some cases even >> lead to assigning a string to an integer variable. > <snip > > You misunderstand. I was telling Evertjan what ECMAScript could do if > it had call_by_reference, which it hasn't. > Isn't that saying the same? > >> You brought up pass by reference, which had little or nothing >> to do with reference types. > > No I didn't. It was Julio who mentioned it, and may be regretting it, > and Evertjan who said that that's the only by_reference that > ECMAScript has. > > John > I do not feel like going back to check who said what. I do acknowledge that the level at which you reason does matter. In the end call by value is the only actual calling mechanism. Call by reference is a pointer passed by value with some extra magic added by the compiler. What happens when "call by sharing" occurs is plain call by value without any need for compiler magic.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Mark-" <nospam@mapson.xyz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-03-25 00:00 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Object values (continued) |
| Message-ID | <r5e6vj$vh6$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #38315 |
John G Harris wrote: Regardless if I agree or disagree concerning the subject. > At least Wikipedia is accessible. What an odd thing to say to support your position.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-03-25 15:05 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Object values (continued) |
| Message-ID | <apsm7fdcerl1khuupo6nut79jb670g9eno@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #38318 |
On Wed, 25 Mar 2020 00:00:51 +0000 (UTC), "Mark-" <nospam@mapson.xyz> wrote: >John G Harris wrote: > >Regardless if I agree or disagree concerning the subject. > >> At least Wikipedia is accessible. > >What an odd thing to say to support your position. Not really. It proves that people who say "No-one else believes that" are wrong. It would be better to quote a university-level book or paper, but these are expensive and hard to find, even more so as this subject was discussed back around 1960. John
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Mark-" <nospam@mapson.xyz> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-03-25 20:12 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Object values (continued) |
| Message-ID | <r5gdvu$18tq$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #38319 |
John G Harris wrote: > On Wed, 25 Mar 2020 00:00:51 +0000 (UTC), "Mark-" <nospam@mapson.xyz> > wrote: > > > John G Harris wrote: > > > > Regardless if I agree or disagree concerning the subject. > > > >> At least Wikipedia is accessible. > > > > What an odd thing to say to support your position. > > Not really. It proves that people who say > "No-one else believes that" are wrong. Yes, really. It is an odd thing to say. Proving people wrong. What a lovely hobby. >You'd prefer this reference would you: I made no comment on the subject. As to the subject...thrrrtttt (that is the fart noise). Lots of misunderstood words being used. Now time for Thomas to point at my handle and whine.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-03-26 18:09 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Object values (continued) |
| Message-ID | <7vrp7ft17gj7olpnci7n75hm2qdouudak3@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #38322 |
On Wed, 25 Mar 2020 20:12:46 +0000 (UTC), "Mark-" <nospam@mapson.xyz> wrote: <snip> >Now time for Thomas to point at my handle and whine. Careful! You are criticising Thomas. His understudy will be annoyed with you. John
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-03-25 19:39 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: Object values (continued) |
| Message-ID | <bpcn7flu194d9p2np8h92lum0gof3dofl0@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #38318 |
On Wed, 25 Mar 2020 00:00:51 +0000 (UTC), "Mark-" <nospam@mapson.xyz> wrote: >John G Harris wrote: > >Regardless if I agree or disagree concerning the subject. > >> At least Wikipedia is accessible. > >What an odd thing to say to support your position. You'd prefer this reference would you : <https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSLTBW_2.2.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r2.cbclx01/cplr233.htm> John
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-03-23 18:49 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e07ba8ff-a8d7-4eb6-945e-1376c671c929@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #38299 |
On Sunday, March 22, 2020 at 5:30:34 PM UTC-5, Evertjan. wrote: > I am not talking about "dereferencing", whatever that is. In a language with a reference model, like JavaScript, variables are l-values. An l-value being the "l"eft side of the '=' symbol, in other words assignment of a reference. An r-value is the "r"ight side of the '=' symbol. When I write: let a = b; I'm not assigning a reference another reference, I'm assigning a reference 'a' to the value of the reference 'b'. The act of getting the value of the reference 'b' is called 'dereferencing'. This dereferencing of the r-value is implicit in JavaScript, so it's not worth mentioning in general IMO. In contrast, if you've ever used a programming language in the ML family, it's not implicit. You use an explicit dereferencing operator (the '!' prefix). A popular ML language is F#. An example of dereferencing there: <https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/fsharp/language-reference/reference-cells>
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4]
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.javascript
csiph-web