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

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #37709 > unrolled thread

Comparisson with a list arguments.

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

Contents

  Comparisson with a list arguments. Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2019-11-08 00:07 -0800
    Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2019-11-08 00:17 -0800
      Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2019-11-08 01:03 -0800
        Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2019-11-08 01:08 -0800
          Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2019-11-08 01:19 -0800
          Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-11-12 12:17 +0100
        Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2019-11-08 01:13 -0800
          Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2019-11-08 01:23 -0800
            Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2019-11-08 01:30 -0800
              Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2019-11-08 02:19 -0800
                Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2019-11-08 02:33 -0800
                  Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-11-12 15:25 +0100
                    Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2019-11-12 06:48 -0800
                      Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-11-12 18:41 +0100
                        Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2019-11-12 09:50 -0800
                          Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-11-12 18:55 +0100
              Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2019-11-08 11:33 +0000
                Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2019-11-08 06:53 -0800
                  Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2019-11-08 19:31 +0000
                    Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2019-11-08 11:38 -0800
                      Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-11-12 15:26 +0100
              Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-11-12 15:23 +0100
          Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Jonas Thörnvall <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> - 2019-11-11 01:31 -0800
        Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-11-12 12:16 +0100
    Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. luserdroog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2019-11-08 08:35 -0800
    Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-11-12 12:13 +0100
      Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2019-11-12 06:39 -0800
        Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-11-12 18:52 +0100
          Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2019-11-12 10:08 -0800
            Re: Comparisson with a list arguments. Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2019-11-14 08:11 +0100

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#37709 — Comparisson with a list arguments.

It would be handy to be able to have a list of arguments to compare with, of course one could store the values in an array use a loop to scroll thru.

But something like this would be easier to use.

if (track[editTrack].midiMess[i].data0 == ("224" || "112" || "128"))


One can wonder why the most obvious solustions never implemented?
I think it is weird, i just don't get it....

And then you end up with a string that is hardly readable, or the need to read in the values into an array. It is just weird, do you guys never favour readability of code?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#37710

On Friday, 8 November 2019 09:07:53 UTC+1, Jonas Thörnvall  wrote:

> if (track[editTrack].midiMess[i].data0 == ("224" || "112" || "128"))
> 
> One can wonder why the most obvious solustions never implemented?
> I think it is weird, i just don't get it....

Shouldn't it rather be obvious (to you!) that you don't know what you are
talking about?

In fact, if you want a "compact" solution, there even is a legitimate one:

   ["224", "112", "128"].includes(myValue)

<https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Array/includes>

HTH,

Julio

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

#37711

Den fredag 8 november 2019 kl. 09:17:11 UTC+1 skrev Julio Di Egidio:
> On Friday, 8 November 2019 09:07:53 UTC+1, Jonas Thörnvall  wrote:
> 
> > if (track[editTrack].midiMess[i].data0 == ("224" || "112" || "128"))
> > 
> > One can wonder why the most obvious solustions never implemented?
> > I think it is weird, i just don't get it....
> 
> Shouldn't it rather be obvious (to you!) that you don't know what you are
> talking about?
> 
> In fact, if you want a "compact" solution, there even is a legitimate one:
> 
>    ["224", "112", "128"].includes(myValue)
> 
> <https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Array/includes>
> 
> HTH,
> 
> Julio

It is totally fucking backward semantics "lingo" but i accept it as some sort of answer.

OK so how do you compare with two or more intervals in javascript?
if(A outside.interval(144-159)) && (A outside.interval(222-300))

Can you give me the lingo for that one....

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

#37712

Den fredag 8 november 2019 kl. 10:03:15 UTC+1 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> Den fredag 8 november 2019 kl. 09:17:11 UTC+1 skrev Julio Di Egidio:
> > On Friday, 8 November 2019 09:07:53 UTC+1, Jonas Thörnvall  wrote:
> > 
> > > if (track[editTrack].midiMess[i].data0 == ("224" || "112" || "128"))
> > > 
> > > One can wonder why the most obvious solustions never implemented?
> > > I think it is weird, i just don't get it....
> > 
> > Shouldn't it rather be obvious (to you!) that you don't know what you are
> > talking about?
> > 
> > In fact, if you want a "compact" solution, there even is a legitimate one:
> > 
> >    ["224", "112", "128"].includes(myValue)
> > 
> > <https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Array/includes>
> > 
> > HTH,
> > 
> > Julio
> 
> It is totally fucking backward semantics "lingo" but i accept it as some sort of answer.
> 
> OK so how do you compare with two or more intervals in javascript?
> if(A outside.interval(144-159)) && (A outside.interval(222-300))
> 
> Can you give me the lingo for that one....

I would probably prefer
if(A outside.interval(144-159) && outside.interval(222-300))
But show me the javascript way...

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

#37714

Den fredag 8 november 2019 kl. 10:08:38 UTC+1 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> Den fredag 8 november 2019 kl. 10:03:15 UTC+1 skrev Jonas Thörnvall:
> > Den fredag 8 november 2019 kl. 09:17:11 UTC+1 skrev Julio Di Egidio:
> > > On Friday, 8 November 2019 09:07:53 UTC+1, Jonas Thörnvall  wrote:
> > > 
> > > > if (track[editTrack].midiMess[i].data0 == ("224" || "112" || "128"))
> > > > 
> > > > One can wonder why the most obvious solustions never implemented?
> > > > I think it is weird, i just don't get it....
> > > 
> > > Shouldn't it rather be obvious (to you!) that you don't know what you are
> > > talking about?
> > > 
> > > In fact, if you want a "compact" solution, there even is a legitimate one:
> > > 
> > >    ["224", "112", "128"].includes(myValue)
> > > 
> > > <https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Array/includes>
> > > 
> > > HTH,
> > > 
> > > Julio
> > 
> > It is totally fucking backward semantics "lingo" but i accept it as some sort of answer.
> > 
> > OK so how do you compare with two or more intervals in javascript?
> > if(A outside.interval(144-159)) && (A outside.interval(222-300))
> > 
> > Can you give me the lingo for that one....
> 
> I would probably prefer
> if(A outside.interval(144-159) && outside.interval(222-300))
> But show me the javascript way...

Let me guess

if (A<144 || (A>159 && A<222)|| A>300)
Now add some more intervals bwahahah it is pretty LoL

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

#37758

On 08.11.19 10:08, Jonas Thörnvall wrote:

[...]
> I would probably prefer
> if(A outside.interval(144-159) && outside.interval(222-300))
> But show me the javascript way...

Didn't we already discuss this to the end?

Implement your own interval check function!

What's so hard to do this?


-- 
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

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

#37713

On Friday, 8 November 2019 10:03:15 UTC+1, Jonas Thörnvall  wrote:
> Den fredag 8 november 2019 kl. 09:17:11 UTC+1 skrev Julio Di Egidio:
> > On Friday, 8 November 2019 09:07:53 UTC+1, Jonas Thörnvall  wrote:
> > 
> > > if (track[editTrack].midiMess[i].data0 == ("224" || "112" || "128"))
> > > 
> > > One can wonder why the most obvious solustions never implemented?
> > > I think it is weird, i just don't get it....
> > 
> > Shouldn't it rather be obvious (to you!) that you don't know what you are
> > talking about?
> > 
> > In fact, if you want a "compact" solution, there even is a legitimate one:
> > 
> >    ["224", "112", "128"].includes(myValue)
> > 
> > <https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Array/includes>
> 
> It is totally fucking backward semantics "lingo" but i accept it as some
> sort of answer.

LOL.

> OK so how do you compare with two or more intervals in javascript?
> if(A outside.interval(144-159)) && (A outside.interval(222-300))
> 
> Can you give me the lingo for that one....

That's a different question, now it's not a list but (virtually continuous)
*intervals*, so you use the maths: (A < min1 && A > max1) && repeat...

And not to just keep duplicating code, you use a function!!!

Or, similarly, not to write huge.ungodly[fucking].mess.base0 all over the
place, you a local variable: then you'll already get very much less annoyed
by just a sequence of few logical conjunctions...

Julio

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

#37715

On Friday, 8 November 2019 10:13:59 UTC+1, Julio Di Egidio  wrote:
> On Friday, 8 November 2019 10:03:15 UTC+1, Jonas Thörnvall  wrote:
> > Den fredag 8 november 2019 kl. 09:17:11 UTC+1 skrev Julio Di Egidio:
> > > On Friday, 8 November 2019 09:07:53 UTC+1, Jonas Thörnvall  wrote:
> > > 
> > > > if (track[editTrack].midiMess[i].data0 == ("224" || "112" || "128"))
> > > > 
> > > > One can wonder why the most obvious solustions never implemented?
> > > > I think it is weird, i just don't get it....
> > > 
> > > Shouldn't it rather be obvious (to you!) that you don't know what you are
> > > talking about?
> > > 
> > > In fact, if you want a "compact" solution, there even is a legitimate one:
> > > 
> > >    ["224", "112", "128"].includes(myValue)
> > > 
> > > <https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Array/includes>
> > 
> > It is totally fucking backward semantics "lingo" but i accept it as some
> > sort of answer.
> 
> LOL.
> 
> > OK so how do you compare with two or more intervals in javascript?
> > if(A outside.interval(144-159)) && (A outside.interval(222-300))
> > 
> > Can you give me the lingo for that one....
> 
> That's a different question, now it's not a list but (virtually continuous)
> *intervals*, so you use the maths: (A < min1 && A > max1) && repeat...
> 
> And not to just keep duplicating code, you use a function!!!
> 
> Or, similarly, not to write huge.ungodly[fucking].mess.base0 all over the
> place, you a local variable: then you'll already get very much less annoyed
> by just a sequence of few logical conjunctions...

Exercise:
Combine all of the above: write a function that takes in input a list of
intervals (in the form of "pairs" of numbers) and a value, and returns whether
the value falls in any one of the intervals.  Also write the converse function,
that tells whether the value is not in any interval (you'll see why you want a
converse function, as opposed to just putting a not in front of a call to the
direct function, when you get to the implementation).

Hint: Do leverage the methods of the Array object.

Hint 2: You'll have to use your brains...

Have fun,

Julio

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

#37716

Den fredag 8 november 2019 kl. 10:23:33 UTC+1 skrev Julio Di Egidio:
> On Friday, 8 November 2019 10:13:59 UTC+1, Julio Di Egidio  wrote:
> > On Friday, 8 November 2019 10:03:15 UTC+1, Jonas Thörnvall  wrote:
> > > Den fredag 8 november 2019 kl. 09:17:11 UTC+1 skrev Julio Di Egidio:
> > > > On Friday, 8 November 2019 09:07:53 UTC+1, Jonas Thörnvall  wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > if (track[editTrack].midiMess[i].data0 == ("224" || "112" || "128"))
> > > > > 
> > > > > One can wonder why the most obvious solustions never implemented?
> > > > > I think it is weird, i just don't get it....
> > > > 
> > > > Shouldn't it rather be obvious (to you!) that you don't know what you are
> > > > talking about?
> > > > 
> > > > In fact, if you want a "compact" solution, there even is a legitimate one:
> > > > 
> > > >    ["224", "112", "128"].includes(myValue)
> > > > 
> > > > <https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Array/includes>
> > > 
> > > It is totally fucking backward semantics "lingo" but i accept it as some
> > > sort of answer.
> > 
> > LOL.
> > 
> > > OK so how do you compare with two or more intervals in javascript?
> > > if(A outside.interval(144-159)) && (A outside.interval(222-300))
> > > 
> > > Can you give me the lingo for that one....
> > 
> > That's a different question, now it's not a list but (virtually continuous)
> > *intervals*, so you use the maths: (A < min1 && A > max1) && repeat...
> > 
> > And not to just keep duplicating code, you use a function!!!
> > 
> > Or, similarly, not to write huge.ungodly[fucking].mess.base0 all over the
> > place, you a local variable: then you'll already get very much less annoyed
> > by just a sequence of few logical conjunctions...
> 
> Exercise:
> Combine all of the above: write a function that takes in input a list of
> intervals (in the form of "pairs" of numbers) and a value, and returns whether
> the value falls in any one of the intervals.  Also write the converse function,
> that tells whether the value is not in any interval (you'll see why you want a
> converse function, as opposed to just putting a not in front of a call to the
> direct function, when you get to the implementation).
> 
> Hint: Do leverage the methods of the Array object.
> 
> Hint 2: You'll have to use your brains...
> 
> Have fun,
> 
> Julio

But is not the idea to make things as easy as possible, not as obfuscated and convoluted as possible? I mean it is a scripting language we are not into blip-blopping we try to raise the context so the syntax can mirror a somewhat working semantic. Or are we protecting our jobs, i just want to know what is going on and why?

This is a script language, made to be available as a learning language, where principles are elevated to reflect human thinking? So ideas that can be presented clear in language should also be possible to implement, or are we trying to create a lingo to cringe books and seminars?

I am not sure longer what the purpose is?

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

#37717

On Friday, 8 November 2019 10:30:10 UTC+1, Jonas Thörnvall  wrote:

> i just want to know what is going on and why?

Though I do doubt the sincerity of your attitude, so be aware that programming
is first and foremost a *discipline*, those were all quite legitimate questions:
but it is going to take some writing, so maybe later...

Meanwhile, anyone of course feel free to chime in.

Julio

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

#37718

Den fredag 8 november 2019 kl. 11:20:06 UTC+1 skrev Julio Di Egidio:
> On Friday, 8 November 2019 10:30:10 UTC+1, Jonas Thörnvall  wrote:
> 
> > i just want to know what is going on and why?
> 
> Though I do doubt the sincerity of your attitude, so be aware that programming
> is first and foremost a *discipline*, those were all quite legitimate questions:
> but it is going to take some writing, so maybe later...
> 
> Meanwhile, anyone of course feel free to chime in.
> 
> Julio

Well i am asking out of self interest, the ideal for me is code that reflect how "i think" and probably how people think do vary a bit. But i am pretty sure my semantics and pseudo syntax resonate better with how none programmers think about logic problems. So why create a layer upon the thought process i just do not get i want to be able to read out information without somekind of interpretation process going on, i can't see who it benefits?

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

#37760

On 08.11.19 11:33, Jonas Thörnvall wrote:

> Den fredag 8 november 2019 kl. 11:20:06 UTC+1 skrev Julio Di Egidio:
>> On Friday, 8 November 2019 10:30:10 UTC+1, Jonas Thörnvall  wrote:
>> 
>>> i just want to know what is going on and why?
>> 
>> Though I do doubt the sincerity of your attitude, so be aware that
>> programming is first and foremost a *discipline*, those were all
>> quite legitimate questions: but it is going to take some writing,
>> so maybe later...
>> 
>> Meanwhile, anyone of course feel free to chime in.
>> 
>> Julio
> 
> Well i am asking out of self interest, the ideal for me is code that
> reflect how "i think" and probably how people think do vary a bit.

Go ahead and try Python or Cobol, maybe that fits your needs better than
C-style languages.


-- 
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

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

#37765

On Tuesday, 12 November 2019 15:25:10 UTC+1, Arno Welzel  wrote:
> On 08.11.19 11:33, Jonas Thörnvall wrote:
> > Den fredag 8 november 2019 kl. 11:20:06 UTC+1 skrev Julio Di Egidio:
> >> On Friday, 8 November 2019 10:30:10 UTC+1, Jonas Thörnvall  wrote:
> >> 
> >>> i just want to know what is going on and why?
> >> 
> >> Though I do doubt the sincerity of your attitude, so be aware that
> >> programming is first and foremost a *discipline*, those were all
> >> quite legitimate questions: but it is going to take some writing,
> >> so maybe later...
> >> 
> >> Meanwhile, anyone of course feel free to chime in.
> > 
> > Well i am asking out of self interest, the ideal for me is code that
> > reflect how "i think" and probably how people think do vary a bit.
> 
> Go ahead and try Python or Cobol, maybe that fits your needs better than
> C-style languages.

What a stupid and just dismissive cheap answer, from a fucking idiot,
I must conclude...  Indeed, you too welcome to my list of utter imbeciles.

Julio

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

#37767

On 12.11.19 15:48, Julio Di Egidio wrote:

> On Tuesday, 12 November 2019 15:25:10 UTC+1, Arno Welzel  wrote:
>> On 08.11.19 11:33, Jonas Thörnvall wrote:
>>> Den fredag 8 november 2019 kl. 11:20:06 UTC+1 skrev Julio Di Egidio:
>>>> On Friday, 8 November 2019 10:30:10 UTC+1, Jonas Thörnvall  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> i just want to know what is going on and why?
>>>>
>>>> Though I do doubt the sincerity of your attitude, so be aware that
>>>> programming is first and foremost a *discipline*, those were all
>>>> quite legitimate questions: but it is going to take some writing,
>>>> so maybe later...
>>>>
>>>> Meanwhile, anyone of course feel free to chime in.
>>>
>>> Well i am asking out of self interest, the ideal for me is code that
>>> reflect how "i think" and probably how people think do vary a bit.
>>
>> Go ahead and try Python or Cobol, maybe that fits your needs better than
>> C-style languages.
> 
> What a stupid and just dismissive cheap answer, from a fucking idiot,
> I must conclude...  Indeed, you too welcome to my list of utter imbeciles.

What an ignorant comment from an arrogant asshole which wouldn't
recognize irony even when it was advertised in front of the text.

-- 
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

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

#37768

On Tuesday, 12 November 2019 18:41:32 UTC+1, Arno Welzel  wrote:
> On 12.11.19 15:48, Julio Di Egidio wrote:
> 
> > On Tuesday, 12 November 2019 15:25:10 UTC+1, Arno Welzel  wrote:
> >> On 08.11.19 11:33, Jonas Thörnvall wrote:
> >>> Den fredag 8 november 2019 kl. 11:20:06 UTC+1 skrev Julio Di Egidio:
> >>>> On Friday, 8 November 2019 10:30:10 UTC+1, Jonas Thörnvall  wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> i just want to know what is going on and why?
> >>>>
> >>>> Though I do doubt the sincerity of your attitude, so be aware that
> >>>> programming is first and foremost a *discipline*, those were all
> >>>> quite legitimate questions: but it is going to take some writing,
> >>>> so maybe later...
> >>>>
> >>>> Meanwhile, anyone of course feel free to chime in.
> >>>
> >>> Well i am asking out of self interest, the ideal for me is code that
> >>> reflect how "i think" and probably how people think do vary a bit.
> >>
> >> Go ahead and try Python or Cobol, maybe that fits your needs better than
> >> C-style languages.
> > 
> > What a stupid and just dismissive cheap answer, from a fucking idiot,
> > I must conclude...  Indeed, you too welcome to my list of utter imbeciles.
> 
> What an ignorant comment from an arrogant asshole which wouldn't
> recognize irony even when it was advertised in front of the text.

Irony is about something, and I have already explained what I am complaining
about: you are entitled to waste your time, not mine...

HTH and EOD.

Julio

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

#37770

On 12.11.19 18:50, Julio Di Egidio wrote:

[...]
> Irony is about something, and I have already explained what I am complaining
> about: you are entitled to waste your time, not mine...

You don't need to read and answer my posts - that's your own choice.

But I forgot: you don't know what "plonk" means and I think you also
don't know what a newsreader with a killfile is - typical first world
problems of Google posters.



-- 
Arno Welzel
https://arnowelzel.de

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

#37719

On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 01:30:03 -0800 (PST), Jonas Thörnvall
<jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> wrote:

  <snip>
>But is not the idea to make things as easy as possible, not as obfuscated and convoluted as possible?
  <snip>

The most important thing for a programming language is to be totally
precise. If the computer does the wrong thing it's because you told it
to do the wrong thing. It's not the job of the compiler and computer
to notice that you might have meant this, or you might have meant
that, then guess which you should have meant.

The next most important thing for a programming language is to be easy
to read so that you can see what you, or someone else, told the
computer to do. Unfortunatel, this might not be entirely possible if
the compiler must be able to run in a small computer, e.g 16 kB with
no disc.

  John

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

#37722

Den fredag 8 november 2019 kl. 12:33:55 UTC+1 skrev John G Harris:
> On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 01:30:03 -0800 (PST), Jonas Thörnvall
> <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>   <snip>
> >But is not the idea to make things as easy as possible, not as obfuscated and convoluted as possible?
>   <snip>
> 
> The most important thing for a programming language is to be totally
> precise. If the computer does the wrong thing it's because you told it
> to do the wrong thing. It's not the job of the compiler and computer
> to notice that you might have meant this, or you might have meant
> that, then guess which you should have meant.
> 
> The next most important thing for a programming language is to be easy
> to read so that you can see what you, or someone else, told the
> computer to do. Unfortunatel, this might not be entirely possible if
> the compiler must be able to run in a small computer, e.g 16 kB with
> no disc.
> 
>   John

So much bullshit, a coherent semantic does not need to be total nonsense, the syntax is what we chose it to be.

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

#37726

On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 06:53:51 -0800 (PST), Jonas Thörnvall
<jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> wrote:

>Den fredag 8 november 2019 kl. 12:33:55 UTC+1 skrev John G Harris:
>> On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 01:30:03 -0800 (PST), Jonas Thörnvall
>> <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>   <snip>
>> >But is not the idea to make things as easy as possible, not as obfuscated and convoluted as possible?
>>   <snip>
>> 
>> The most important thing for a programming language is to be totally
>> precise. If the computer does the wrong thing it's because you told it
>> to do the wrong thing. It's not the job of the compiler and computer
>> to notice that you might have meant this, or you might have meant
>> that, then guess which you should have meant.
>> 
>> The next most important thing for a programming language is to be easy
>> to read so that you can see what you, or someone else, told the
>> computer to do. Unfortunatel, this might not be entirely possible if
>> the compiler must be able to run in a small computer, e.g 16 kB with
>> no disc.
>> 
>>   John
>
>So much bullshit, 

In what way ?


>a coherent semantic does not need to be total nonsense, 

There's an example of the first priciple failed : I've no idea what
you mean.


>the syntax is what we chose it to be.

Well yes, so why are you complaining about the syntax that was chosen.

  John

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

#37727

Den fredag 8 november 2019 kl. 20:31:37 UTC+1 skrev John G Harris:
> On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 06:53:51 -0800 (PST), Jonas Thörnvall
> <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> >Den fredag 8 november 2019 kl. 12:33:55 UTC+1 skrev John G Harris:
> >> On Fri, 8 Nov 2019 01:30:03 -0800 (PST), Jonas Thörnvall
> >> <jonas.thornvall@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >>   <snip>
> >> >But is not the idea to make things as easy as possible, not as obfuscated and convoluted as possible?
> >>   <snip>
> >> 
> >> The most important thing for a programming language is to be totally
> >> precise. If the computer does the wrong thing it's because you told it
> >> to do the wrong thing. It's not the job of the compiler and computer
> >> to notice that you might have meant this, or you might have meant
> >> that, then guess which you should have meant.
> >> 
> >> The next most important thing for a programming language is to be easy
> >> to read so that you can see what you, or someone else, told the
> >> computer to do. Unfortunatel, this might not be entirely possible if
> >> the compiler must be able to run in a small computer, e.g 16 kB with
> >> no disc.
> >> 
> >>   John
> >
> >So much bullshit, 
> 
> In what way ?
> 
> 
> >a coherent semantic does not need to be total nonsense, 
> 
> There's an example of the first priciple failed : I've no idea what
> you mean.
> 
> 
> >the syntax is what we chose it to be.
> 
> Well yes, so why are you complaining about the syntax that was chosen.
> 
>   John

It does not make sense.

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

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

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

csiph-web