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

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #21141 > unrolled thread

FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen

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

Contents

  FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-09-01 13:49 -0700
    Re: FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen Matt McDonald <matt@fortybelow.ca> - 2013-09-02 15:03 -0400
      Re: FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-09-02 21:51 +0200
        Re: FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-09-05 20:06 -0700
          [FAQ] Suggestions (was: FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-09-06 12:14 +0200
            Re: [FAQ] Suggestions (was: FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen) John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-09-07 15:44 +0100
              Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-09-08 21:54 +0200
                Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-09-09 02:20 +0200
                Re: [FAQ] Suggestions John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-09-09 10:55 +0100
                  Re: [FAQ] Suggestions dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-09-09 13:53 -0700
                    Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-09-10 00:10 +0200
                      Re: [FAQ] Suggestions John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-09-11 14:58 +0100
                  Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-09-10 00:30 +0200
                    Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-09-11 19:28 +0100
                      Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-09-14 01:28 +0200
                        Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-09-15 18:36 +0100
                          Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2013-09-16 12:26 +1000
                            Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-09-16 08:19 +0000
                              Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2013-09-16 22:52 +1000
                                Re: [FAQ] Suggestions John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-09-16 16:00 +0100
                                  Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-09-16 22:08 +0200
                                    Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2013-09-16 23:23 +0200
                                      Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-09-17 00:53 +0200
                                        Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2013-09-17 01:14 +0100
                                          Re: [FAQ] Suggestions John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-09-17 15:35 +0100
                                    Re: [FAQ] Suggestions John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-09-17 15:32 +0100
                                      Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-09-18 01:12 +0200
                                        Re: [FAQ] Suggestions John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-09-18 10:12 +0100
                                          Re: [FAQ] Suggestions "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2013-09-18 11:52 +0200
                                            Re: [FAQ] Suggestions John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-09-19 11:29 +0100
                                              Re: [FAQ] Suggestions "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2013-09-19 13:44 +0200
                                                Re: [FAQ] Suggestions John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-09-20 11:39 +0100
                                                  Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-09-27 01:40 +0200
                                                    Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-09-28 17:54 +0100
                                                      Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-09-29 01:04 +0000
                                                        Re: [FAQ] Suggestions dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-09-28 21:03 -0700
                                                        Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-09-30 14:22 +0200
                                                          Re: [FAQ] Suggestions John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-10-01 10:52 +0100
                                                            Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-10-02 01:39 +0200
                                                              Re: [FAQ] Suggestions John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-10-02 15:18 +0100
                                                                Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-10-02 23:14 +0200
                                                                  Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-10-03 09:54 +0200
                                                                  Re: [FAQ] Suggestions John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-10-03 15:50 +0100
                                                                    Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-10-07 23:03 +0200
                                                              Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Cezary Tomczyk <cezary.tomczyk@gmail.com> - 2013-10-02 19:01 +0200
                                                              Re: [FAQ] Suggestions dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-10-06 10:45 -0700
                                                                Re: [FAQ] Suggestions John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-10-06 20:14 +0100
                                                                  Re: [FAQ] Suggestions dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-10-07 12:50 -0700
                                                                    Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-10-07 21:57 +0000
                                                                Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-10-07 22:43 +0200
                                                                  Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-10-10 02:10 +0200
                                                          Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-10-01 19:29 +0100
                                                      Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-10-02 01:52 +0200
                                              Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Swifty <steve.j.swift@gmail.com> - 2013-09-19 18:07 +0100
                                                Re: [FAQ] Suggestions "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2013-09-19 21:23 +0200
                                                  Re: [FAQ] Suggestions John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-09-20 11:48 +0100
                                                  Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2013-09-20 12:24 -0700
                              Re: [FAQ] Suggestions "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2013-09-17 00:03 +0200
                Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-09-09 19:46 +0100
            Re: [FAQ] Suggestions (was: FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen) Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-09-07 20:11 +0100
              Re: [FAQ] Suggestions (was: FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen) Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2013-09-07 23:59 +0100
                Re: [FAQ] Suggestions (was: FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen) "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2013-09-08 09:24 +0200
                  Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-09-08 22:01 +0200
              Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-09-12 15:12 +0200
                Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2013-09-12 14:33 +0100
                  Re: [FAQ] Suggestions Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-09-12 15:43 +0200
    Re: FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-09-02 23:15 +0200
    Re: FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-09-02 19:02 +0100
      Re: FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2013-09-05 20:05 -0700
        Re: FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-09-12 12:05 +0200
          Re: FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2013-09-12 13:22 +0300
            Re: FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-09-12 15:29 +0200
              Re: FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen Mike Duffy <md_002@videotron.ca> - 2013-09-12 10:43 -0400
          Re: FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-09-12 16:19 +0100
            Re: FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-09-12 18:08 +0200
              Re: FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2013-09-13 15:51 +0100
          Re: FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen Dr J R Stockton <reply1300@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2013-09-13 20:32 +0100
            Re: FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen Eric Bednarz <bednarz@fahr-zur-hoelle.org> - 2013-09-19 01:40 +0200
    Re: FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2013-09-03 00:02 +0200
    Re: FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2013-09-03 01:10 +0200
      Re: FAQ Problems, DHTML Kitchen Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-09-04 19:50 +0000

Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5  Next page →

#21363 — Re: [FAQ] Suggestions

John Harris wrote:

> On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 22:52:02 +1000, Andrew Poulos
> <ap_prog@hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>   <snip> (n.b "PE" is Thomas Lahn)
>> PE has acknowledged errors when he has made them.
>   <snip>
> 
> All right, we'll believe you. 

Otherwise the newsgroup archive could confirm that.

>                               Let's try a little experiment. Here is a
> truth that has surprised some people in the past :
> 
> The *only* thing in ECMA 262 that stops 
>   a = newb();
> being parsed the same as
>   a = new b();
> is the second sentence in section 7 which goes :
> "The source text is scanned from left to right, repeatedly taking the
> longest possible sequence of characters as the next input element."

I doubt that this rule has surprised some people, as the rule is so
common and natural.  I am not aware of *any* programming language
scanner that doesn't do it this way; and if I'm not mistaken, it is
never part of the actual grammar rules.  E.g. flex(1) imposes this rule
to all lexical grammars[1].

[1] <http://flex.sourceforge.net/manual/Matching.html#Matching>

-- 
Christoph M. Becker

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

#21364 — Re: [FAQ] Suggestions

On 2013-09-16 22:08, Christoph Michael Becker wrote:
> John Harris wrote:
>>                               Let's try a little experiment. Here is a
>> truth that has surprised some people in the past :
>> 
>> The *only* thing in ECMA 262 that stops 
>>   a = newb();
>> being parsed the same as
>>   a = new b();
>> is the second sentence in section 7 which goes :
>> "The source text is scanned from left to right, repeatedly taking the
>> longest possible sequence of characters as the next input element."
> 
> I doubt that this rule has surprised some people, as the rule is so
> common and natural.  I am not aware of *any* programming language
> scanner that doesn't do it this way; and if I'm not mistaken, it is
> never part of the actual grammar rules.

Challenge accepted ;)
http://www.dangermouse.net/esoteric/piet/samples.html

- stefan

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

#21367 — Re: [FAQ] Suggestions

Stefan Weiss wrote:

> On 2013-09-16 22:08, Christoph Michael Becker wrote:
>> John Harris wrote:
>>>                               Let's try a little experiment. Here is a
>>> truth that has surprised some people in the past :
>>>
>>> The *only* thing in ECMA 262 that stops 
>>>   a = newb();
>>> being parsed the same as
>>>   a = new b();
>>> is the second sentence in section 7 which goes :
>>> "The source text is scanned from left to right, repeatedly taking the
>>> longest possible sequence of characters as the next input element."
>>
>> I doubt that this rule has surprised some people, as the rule is so
>> common and natural.  I am not aware of *any* programming language
>> scanner that doesn't do it this way; and if I'm not mistaken, it is
>> never part of the actual grammar rules.
> 
> Challenge accepted ;)
> http://www.dangermouse.net/esoteric/piet/samples.html

I stand corrected.  I'm very much intrigued by this extremly powerful
language, and I hope that it will be possible to compile it to asm.js in
the near future.  This should really ease browser side scripting
tremendously, as we all know the DOM is a mess[1].  I'm looking forward
to a bright and colorful future.

Well, kidding aside: I was referring to classic "textual" languages.

BTW: you have participated in the thread that John referred to.

[1] <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dgI52y27O_I>

-- 
Christoph M. Becker

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

#21368 — Re: [FAQ] Suggestions

Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> writes:

> Stefan Weiss wrote:
>
>> On 2013-09-16 22:08, Christoph Michael Becker wrote:
>>> John Harris wrote:
<snip>
>>>> The *only* thing in ECMA 262 that stops 
>>>>   a = newb();
>>>> being parsed the same as
>>>>   a = new b();
>>>> is the second sentence in section 7 which goes :
>>>> "The source text is scanned from left to right, repeatedly taking the
>>>> longest possible sequence of characters as the next input element."
>>>
>>> I doubt that this rule has surprised some people, as the rule is so
>>> common and natural.  I am not aware of *any* programming language
>>> scanner that doesn't do it this way; and if I'm not mistaken, it is
>>> never part of the actual grammar rules.
<snip>
> Well, kidding aside: I was referring to classic "textual" languages.

It is famously true of Fortran:

      PROGRAM PARSE
      DO10I=0.10
      DO10I=0,10
 10   DO10I=DO10I+I
 99   FORMAT(E10.3)
      WRITE(6,99)DO10I
      END

On the second and third lines, it is not clear until the period or the
comma how to parse the line.  The second line is an assignment to a
variable called DO10I, but the third is a DO loop, bounded by the label
10, with control variable I.

However, this was immediately regarded as a mistake, so it is in no way
a conter-example to your main point that "maximal munch" lexing is very
much the norm.

-- 
Ben.

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

#21371 — Re: [FAQ] Suggestions

On Tue, 17 Sep 2013 01:14:22 +0100, Ben Bacarisse
<ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:

>Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> writes:
>
>> Stefan Weiss wrote:
>>
>>> On 2013-09-16 22:08, Christoph Michael Becker wrote:
>>>> John Harris wrote:
><snip>
>>>>> The *only* thing in ECMA 262 that stops 
>>>>>   a = newb();
>>>>> being parsed the same as
>>>>>   a = new b();
>>>>> is the second sentence in section 7 which goes :
>>>>> "The source text is scanned from left to right, repeatedly taking the
>>>>> longest possible sequence of characters as the next input element."
>>>>
>>>> I doubt that this rule has surprised some people, as the rule is so
>>>> common and natural.  I am not aware of *any* programming language
>>>> scanner that doesn't do it this way; and if I'm not mistaken, it is
>>>> never part of the actual grammar rules.
><snip>
>> Well, kidding aside: I was referring to classic "textual" languages.
>
>It is famously true of Fortran:
>
>      PROGRAM PARSE
>      DO10I=0.10
>      DO10I=0,10
> 10   DO10I=DO10I+I
> 99   FORMAT(E10.3)
>      WRITE(6,99)DO10I
>      END
>
>On the second and third lines, it is not clear until the period or the
>comma how to parse the line.  The second line is an assignment to a
>variable called DO10I, but the third is a DO loop, bounded by the label
>10, with control variable I.
>
>However, this was immediately regarded as a mistake, so it is in no way
>a conter-example to your main point that "maximal munch" lexing is very
>much the norm.

Yes. Peoplearesomuchclevererthancomputers.

  John

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

#21370 — Re: [FAQ] Suggestions

On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 22:08:47 +0200, Christoph Michael Becker
<cmbecker69@arcor.de> wrote:

>John Harris wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 22:52:02 +1000, Andrew Poulos
>> <ap_prog@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>   <snip> (n.b "PE" is Thomas Lahn)
>>> PE has acknowledged errors when he has made them.
>>   <snip>
>> 
>> All right, we'll believe you. 
>
>Otherwise the newsgroup archive could confirm that.
>
>>                               Let's try a little experiment. Here is a
>> truth that has surprised some people in the past :
>> 
>> The *only* thing in ECMA 262 that stops 
>>   a = newb();
>> being parsed the same as
>>   a = new b();
>> is the second sentence in section 7 which goes :
>> "The source text is scanned from left to right, repeatedly taking the
>> longest possible sequence of characters as the next input element."
>
>I doubt that this rule has surprised some people, as the rule is so
>common and natural. 

The question is not whether the parser does this; the question is
where is it specified. I say it's in section 7, *and nowhere else*.
This has been denied by some people in the past.


> I am not aware of *any* programming language
>scanner that doesn't do it this way; and if I'm not mistaken, it is
>never part of the actual grammar rules.
  <snip>

It could be part of the rules but it would be rather messy, with
[lookahead ... ] all over the place. 

For instance :
  = [lookahead not =]
  == [lookahead not =]
  ===
  < [lookahead not =]
  <=

  John

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

#21372 — Re: [FAQ] Suggestions

John Harris wrote:

> On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 22:08:47 +0200, Christoph Michael Becker
> <cmbecker69@arcor.de> wrote:
> 
>> John Harris wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 16 Sep 2013 22:52:02 +1000, Andrew Poulos
>>> <ap_prog@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>   <snip> (n.b "PE" is Thomas Lahn)
>>>> PE has acknowledged errors when he has made them.
>>>   <snip>
>>>
>>> All right, we'll believe you. 
>>
>> Otherwise the newsgroup archive could confirm that.
>>
>>>                               Let's try a little experiment. Here is a
>>> truth that has surprised some people in the past :
>>>
>>> The *only* thing in ECMA 262 that stops 
>>>   a = newb();
>>> being parsed the same as
>>>   a = new b();
>>> is the second sentence in section 7 which goes :
>>> "The source text is scanned from left to right, repeatedly taking the
>>> longest possible sequence of characters as the next input element."
>>
>> I doubt that this rule has surprised some people, as the rule is so
>> common and natural. 
> 
> The question is not whether the parser does this; the question is
> where is it specified. I say it's in section 7, *and nowhere else*.
> This has been denied by some people in the past.

I have read nearly the complete thread you're referring to.  It seems to
me that it was a misunderstanding, likely being caused by the context in
which you claimed it--you somehow compared the *parsing* (which deals
with nonterminal symbols) of nested if/else statements with the
*scanning* (which deals with terminal symbols) of "newb".  On a quick
glance this detail might not have been obvious, and then the discussion
has quickly evolved to a mudslinging, unfortunately.

Anyway, later on "some people" confirmed that scanning the longest match
is common, even if they did not explicitely state that this is catered
for by ECMA 262 (whatever edition), section 7, sentence 2, but relying
on the common understanding of how lexers typically work.

If I *had* to judge it, I'd say: you were right, but they were not wrong. :)

-- 
Christoph M. Becker

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

#21375 — Re: [FAQ] Suggestions

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 01:12:28 +0200, Christoph Michael Becker
<cmbecker69@arcor.de> wrote:

  <snip>
>I have read nearly the complete thread you're referring to.  It seems to
>me that it was a misunderstanding, likely being caused by the context in
>which you claimed it--you somehow compared the *parsing* (which deals
>with nonterminal symbols) of nested if/else statements with the
>*scanning* (which deals with terminal symbols) of "newb".  On a quick
>glance this detail might not have been obvious, and then the discussion
>has quickly evolved to a mudslinging, unfortunately.
>
>Anyway, later on "some people" confirmed that scanning the longest match
>is common, even if they did not explicitely state that this is catered
>for by ECMA 262 (whatever edition), section 7, sentence 2, but relying
>on the common understanding of how lexers typically work.
>
>If I *had* to judge it, I'd say: you were right, but they were not wrong. :)

That's the point I'm making here. We have a candidate for FAQ Editor
who will not check to see if there's been a misunderstanding (there
was, by him) at best, or admit he was wrong (he was) at worst.

Do you really want him to be our FAQ Editor ?

  John

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

#21377 — Re: [FAQ] Suggestions

John Harris wrote on 18 sep 2013 in comp.lang.javascript:
> That's the point I'm making here. We have a candidate for FAQ Editor

A maintainer is not the same as an editor.

> who will not check to see if there's been a misunderstanding (there
> was, by him) at best, 

It is our job to check the maintainer.

> or admit he was wrong (he was) at worst.

No admission needed, the FAQ need not reflect his personal ideas.

> Do you really want him to be our FAQ Editor ?

I do. I am not blinded by the idea that a maintainer must be a likable guy 
[or lass], but if he can consensiously distinguish between his ideas and 
the consensus. I think PE can. 

-- 
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

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

#21384 — Re: [FAQ] Suggestions

On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 11:52:09 +0200, "Evertjan."
<exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> wrote:

>John Harris wrote on 18 sep 2013 in comp.lang.javascript:

   <snip>
>> Do you really want him to be our FAQ Editor ?
>
>I do. I am not blinded by the idea that a maintainer must be a likable guy 
>[or lass], but if he can consensiously distinguish between his ideas and 
>the consensus. I think PE can. 

It's your last sentence that I seriously doubt.

  John

PS  I think you meant 'conscientiously'. (I have trouble with it as
well).

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

#21386 — Re: [FAQ] Suggestions

John Harris wrote on 19 sep 2013 in comp.lang.javascript:

> On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 11:52:09 +0200, "Evertjan."
> <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> wrote:
> 
>>John Harris wrote on 18 sep 2013 in comp.lang.javascript:
> 
>    <snip>
>>> Do you really want him to be our FAQ Editor ?
>>
>>I do. I am not blinded by the idea that a maintainer must be a likable
>>guy [or lass], but if he can consensiously distinguish between his
>>ideas and the consensus. I think PE can. 
> 
> It's your last sentence that I seriously doubt.

Why? 

Did he say so, or do you still want this theoretical "likable" guy?

People can act differently depending on their momentary situation or job.

> PS  I think you meant 'conscientiously'. (I have trouble with it as
> well).

What if I didn't, being an unconscious objector? ;-)

-- 
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

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

#21397 — Re: [FAQ] Suggestions

On Thu, 19 Sep 2013 13:44:42 +0200, "Evertjan."
<exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> wrote:

>John Harris wrote on 19 sep 2013 in comp.lang.javascript:
>
>> On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 11:52:09 +0200, "Evertjan."
>> <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> wrote:
>> 
>>>John Harris wrote on 18 sep 2013 in comp.lang.javascript:
>> 
>>    <snip>
>>>> Do you really want him to be our FAQ Editor ?
>>>
>>>I do. I am not blinded by the idea that a maintainer must be a likable
>>>guy [or lass], but if he can consensiously distinguish between his
>>>ideas and the consensus. I think PE can. 
>> 
>> It's your last sentence that I seriously doubt.
>
>Why? 
>
>Did he say so,

He did say he needs to be convinced before changing the FAQ
(7-5-2013).


> or do you still want this theoretical "likable" guy?
  <snip>

I think his behaviour towards newcomers is despicable, but that's not
what I'm talking about here.

  John

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

#21440 — Re: [FAQ] Suggestions

John Harris wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Sep 2013 13:44:42 +0200, "Evertjan."
> <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> wrote:
> 
>> John Harris wrote on 19 sep 2013 in comp.lang.javascript:
>>
>>> On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 11:52:09 +0200, "Evertjan."
>>> <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> John Harris wrote on 18 sep 2013 in comp.lang.javascript:
>>>
>>>    <snip>
>>>>> Do you really want him to be our FAQ Editor ?
>>>>
>>>> I do. I am not blinded by the idea that a maintainer must be a likable
>>>> guy [or lass], but if he can consensiously distinguish between his
>>>> ideas and the consensus. I think PE can. 
>>>
>>> It's your last sentence that I seriously doubt.
>>
>> Why? 
>>
>> Did he say so,
> 
> He did say he needs to be convinced before changing the FAQ
> (7-5-2013).

So you may consider to test him by actually proposing a change to the
FAQ, instead of raking over old coals.

BTW: in this case I had preferred the message ID instead of a somewhat
vage date to refer to his posting.

>> or do you still want this theoretical "likable" guy?
>   <snip>
> 
> I think his behaviour towards newcomers is despicable, 

Not necessarily.

>                                                        but that's not
> what I'm talking about here.

Indeed.  You're stating that Thomas is not suited as FAQ maintainer, and
hence, as there is no alternative candidate (or is there?), it seems
you're preferring an unmaintained FAQ.

-- 
Christoph M. Becker

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

#21456 — Re: [FAQ] Suggestions

In comp.lang.javascript message <5244c5cd$0$6562$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arc
or-online.net>, Fri, 27 Sep 2013 01:40:54, Christoph Michael Becker
<cmbecker69@arcor.de> posted:
>John Harris wrote:

>Indeed.  You're stating that Thomas is not suited as FAQ maintainer, and
>hence, as there is no alternative candidate (or is there?), it seems
>you're preferring an unmaintained FAQ.

I support John Harris in that.

-- 
 (c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK.  ¬@merlyn.demon.co.uk   Turnpike v6.05   MIME.
   Web  <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
 Proper <= 4-line sig. separator as above, a line exactly "-- " (SonOfRFC1036)
 Do not Mail News to me. Before a reply, quote with ">" or "> " (SonOfRFC1036)

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

#21459 — Re: [FAQ] Suggestions

On Sat, 28 Sep 2013 17:54:24 +0100, Dr J R Stockton wrote:

> In comp.lang.javascript message <5244c5cd$0$6562$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arc
> or-online.net>, Fri, 27 Sep 2013 01:40:54, Christoph Michael Becker
> <cmbecker69@arcor.de> posted:
>>John Harris wrote:
> 
>>Indeed.  You're stating that Thomas is not suited as FAQ maintainer, and
>>hence, as there is no alternative candidate (or is there?), it seems
>>you're preferring an unmaintained FAQ.
> 
> I support John Harris in that.

So do I.

-- 
Denis McMahon, denismfmcmahon@gmail.com

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

#21460 — Re: [FAQ] Suggestions

On Saturday, September 28, 2013 6:04:20 PM UTC-7, Denis McMahon wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Sep 2013 17:54:24 +0100, Dr J R Stockton wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > In comp.lang.javascript message <5244c5cd$0$6562$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arc
> 
> > or-online.net>, Fri, 27 Sep 2013 01:40:54, Christoph Michael Becker
> 
> > <cmbecker69@arcor.de> posted:
> 
> >>John Harris wrote:
> 
> > 
> 
> >>Indeed.  You're stating that Thomas is not suited as FAQ maintainer, and
> 
> >>hence, as there is no alternative candidate (or is there?), it seems
> 
> >>you're preferring an unmaintained FAQ.
> 
> > 
> 
> > I support John Harris in that.
> 
> 
> 
> So do I.
> 
> 
I want to update the FAQ with the changes I proposed. Is it OK?

I want to add the FAQ to dhtmlkitchen.com when that is done. 

For dhtmlkitchen, I am not asking much and I am very, very poor. 
http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/dhtmlkitchen-ii/x/4553807

Truth be told, I do not like money! Especially not in its current incarnation, as defined by monetarists. Slaves own no land, and I must have money to pay my rent. 

I did not abandon the FAQ, but actively sought for a new recruit. I really wanted Conrad Lender to do it. I Endorsed Thomas (sorry to have offended by calling you by your last name first, I meant nothing by that). 

The last two years, I have been making personal growth and development, learning and purging all that is wrong in me; trying to do right in a world driven by greed, avarice, influence over others, and facing mass indifference to meaning in life and the evil that the rest of the populace participates in. 

I have occupied. 

I have written much about the greater aspects of how money affects us, about the imbalance of power.

I have promoted urban agriculture and fought for food justice. 

I worked to prepare to teach a class for guitar improvisation.

And I have learned better fighting skills, while learning to tolerate those who try my patience. 

Fame, money, and materialism is not to be found here.
-- 
Garrett
http://personx.tumblr.com/

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

#21476 — Re: [FAQ] Suggestions

Denis McMahon wrote:

> On Sat, 28 Sep 2013 17:54:24 +0100, Dr J R Stockton wrote:
>> In comp.lang.javascript message <5244c5cd$0$6562$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arc
>> or-online.net>, Fri, 27 Sep 2013 01:40:54, Christoph Michael Becker
>> <cmbecker69@arcor.de> posted:
>>> John Harris wrote:
>>>  
>>> Indeed.  You're stating that Thomas is not suited as FAQ maintainer, and
>>> hence, as there is no alternative candidate (or is there?), it seems
>>> you're preferring an unmaintained FAQ.
>> 
>> I support John Harris in that.
> 
> So do I.

               Postings since 2013-08-01 00:00+0200
____________________________________________________________________
                    On-topic¹  Off-topic²  Ad hominem³  OnT−OT−2×AdH
____________________________________________________________________
FAQ server                 51           0            0            51
Stefan Weiss               21           3            1            16
Ben Bacarisse              17           2            1            13
Christoph Michael Becker   17           8            0             9
Michael Haufe (TNO)         6           0            0             6
Evertjan.                  16           6            2             6
Cezary Tomczyk              4           0            0             4
Bart Van der Donck          1           0            0             1
Dr J R Stockton            20           6            7             0
Denis McMahon               6           2            2             0
Joao Rodrigues              2           2            1           − 2
Eric Bednarz                0           1            1           − 3
Tim Streater                0           5            4           −13
Andrew Poulos               4          11            6           −19
John Harris                 8          29           20           −61
____________________________________________________________________
¹ Factually wrong postings can be on-topic
² Postings can be on-topic and off-topic at the same time
³ Both on-topic and off-topic postings can contain ad-hominem
  arguments; the number is not a measure of intensity.
____________________________________________________________________

YMMV.

-- 
PointedEars

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

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

#21481 — Re: [FAQ] Suggestions

On Mon, 30 Sep 2013 14:22:01 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
<PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

>Denis McMahon wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 28 Sep 2013 17:54:24 +0100, Dr J R Stockton wrote:
>>> In comp.lang.javascript message <5244c5cd$0$6562$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arc
>>> or-online.net>, Fri, 27 Sep 2013 01:40:54, Christoph Michael Becker
>>> <cmbecker69@arcor.de> posted:
>>>> John Harris wrote:
>>>>  
>>>> Indeed.  You're stating that Thomas is not suited as FAQ maintainer, and
>>>> hence, as there is no alternative candidate (or is there?), it seems
>>>> you're preferring an unmaintained FAQ.
>>> 
>>> I support John Harris in that.
>> 
>> So do I.
>
>               Postings since 2013-08-01 00:00+0200
>____________________________________________________________________
>                    On-topic¹  Off-topic²  Ad hominem³  OnT?OT?2×AdH
>____________________________________________________________________

  <snip>
>John Harris                 8          29           20           ?61
>____________________________________________________________________
  <snip>

Let us remind ourselves : an ad hominem argument is one that takes the
general form :

  What you say is wrong because you are a/an <insult>.

It's the  "because you are"  part that makes it a fallacy.

If there is no saying referred to, not even implicitly, or
if there is no 'because', not even implicitly, or
if there is no insult, not even implicitly,
then it is not an ad hominem argument.

I have looked through the articles I have posted in Aug and Sept and
found that the ad hominem count is not 20, it is 0 (zero).

  John

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

#21494 — Re: [FAQ] Suggestions

John Harris wrote:

> On Mon, 30 Sep 2013 14:22:01 +0200, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
> <PointedEars@web.de> wrote:
> 
>> Denis McMahon wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 28 Sep 2013 17:54:24 +0100, Dr J R Stockton wrote:
>>>> In comp.lang.javascript message <5244c5cd$0$6562$9b4e6d93@newsspool4.arc
>>>> or-online.net>, Fri, 27 Sep 2013 01:40:54, Christoph Michael Becker
>>>> <cmbecker69@arcor.de> posted:
>>>>> John Harris wrote:
>>>>>  
>>>>> Indeed.  You're stating that Thomas is not suited as FAQ maintainer, and
>>>>> hence, as there is no alternative candidate (or is there?), it seems
>>>>> you're preferring an unmaintained FAQ.
>>>>
>>>> I support John Harris in that.
>>>
>>> So do I.
>>
>>               Postings since 2013-08-01 00:00+0200
>> ____________________________________________________________________
>>                    On-topic¹  Off-topic²  Ad hominem³  OnT?OT?2×AdH
>> ____________________________________________________________________
> 
>   <snip>
>> John Harris                 8          29           20           ?61
>> ____________________________________________________________________
>   <snip>
> 
> Let us remind ourselves : an ad hominem argument is one that takes the
> general form :
> 
>   What you say is wrong because you are a/an <insult>.

No.  An "ad hominem" argument *can* be made without any insult, e.g. in
the case of some "ad hominem to quoque" arguments.

[snipped "ex falso quodlibet" argumentation]

Um, I wonder, do we argue on c.l.js about arguing, *or* do we look for a
maintainer of the FAQ to stop further sending of outdated information by
a bot and leading newcomers to this outdated information?  If the latter
is the case (what I still do hope), we may concentrate on the
*available* candidates.  If I'm not mistaken, these are Thomas Lahn and
Garret Smith--or are there any others?  *If* there is nobody else, the
solution seems to be quite simple:

  I vote for:
  [ ] Thomas Lahn
  [ ] Garret Smith
  [ ] no maintainer / postpone the decision for another year

If there is no perfect fit for you, choose the lesser evil or abstain
from voting. :)

-- 
Christoph M. Becker

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

#21502 — Re: [FAQ] Suggestions

On Wed, 02 Oct 2013 01:39:51 +0200, Christoph Michael Becker
<cmbecker69@arcor.de> wrote:

>John Harris wrote:

  <snip>
>> Let us remind ourselves : an ad hominem argument is one that takes the
>> general form :
>> 
>>   What you say is wrong because you are a/an <insult>.
>
>No.  An "ad hominem" argument *can* be made without any insult, e.g. in
>the case of some "ad hominem to quoque" arguments.

Thomas may be using one phrase to mean two different things, but if he
is then it's his problem, not mine.


>[snipped "ex falso quodlibet" argumentation]

If Wikipedia's definition of "ex falso quodlibet" is correct then you
have quoted the wrong Latin phrase. Are you trying to say my 'ad
hominem' count is wrong ? (If so it's still the wrong Latin phrase).


>Um, I wonder, do we argue on c.l.js about arguing, *or* do we look for a
>maintainer of the FAQ to stop further sending of outdated information by
>a bot and leading newcomers to this outdated information?
  <snip>

We are doing job interviews where the candidates' suitability for the
job of FAQ Maintainer are being discussed. Evidence from their posted
Usenet articles are about the only evidence we have.

  John

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

Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5  Next page →

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

csiph-web