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

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #29076 > unrolled thread

Re: references to DOM parts

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: references to DOM parts JJ <jj4public@vfemail.net> - 2015-12-31 11:47 +0700
    Re: references to DOM parts "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-12-31 11:11 +0100
      Re: references to DOM parts JJ <jj4public@vfemail.net> - 2015-12-31 21:15 +0700
        Re: references to DOM parts Aleksandro <aleksandro@gmx.com> - 2015-12-31 13:35 -0300
          Re: references to DOM parts "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-12-31 19:19 +0100
            Re: references to DOM parts Aleksandro <aleksandro@gmx.com> - 2015-12-31 15:41 -0300
              Re: references to DOM parts Joao Rodrigues <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com.br> - 2015-12-31 21:23 -0200
              Re: references to DOM parts JJ <jj4public@vfemail.net> - 2016-01-01 06:54 +0700
                Re: references to DOM parts Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-01-01 03:36 +0100
                  Re: references to DOM parts Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-01 17:30 +1100
                    Re: references to DOM parts Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-01-01 10:31 +0100
                    Re: references to DOM parts "J.R." <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com.br> - 2016-01-03 00:37 -0800
                      Re: references to DOM parts Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2016-01-03 20:10 +1100
                        Re: references to DOM parts Joao Rodrigues <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com.br> - 2016-01-03 03:32 -0800
                          Re: references to DOM parts Mark - <nonemail@spamspamapam.net> - 2016-01-03 14:36 +0000
                            Re: references to DOM parts Aleksandro <aleksandro@gmx.com> - 2016-01-03 16:55 -0300
                              Re: references to DOM parts Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-01-03 23:47 +0100
                              Re: references to DOM parts Aleksandro <aleksandro@gmx.com> - 2016-01-03 20:51 -0300
                                Re: references to DOM parts Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-01-04 02:42 +0100
                                  Re: references to DOM parts Aleksandro <aleksandro@gmx.com> - 2016-01-03 23:13 -0300
                              Re: references to DOM parts Joao Rodrigues <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com.br> - 2016-01-04 09:07 -0200
                                Re: references to DOM parts Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-01-04 22:17 +0100
                                  Re: references to DOM parts Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2016-01-05 15:36 +0100
                                    Re: references to DOM parts "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2016-01-05 16:19 +0100
                                      Re: references to DOM parts Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2016-01-05 18:09 +0000
                                        Re: references to DOM parts "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2016-01-05 20:13 +0100
                                          Re: references to DOM parts Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> - 2016-01-07 14:02 +0100
                                            Re: references to DOM parts "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2016-01-07 16:50 +0100
                                            Re: references to DOM parts Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-01-07 18:41 +0100
                                              Re: references to DOM parts John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2016-01-07 18:12 +0000
                                                Re: references to DOM parts Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-01-07 20:18 +0100
                                                  Re: references to DOM parts Aleksandro <aleksandro@gmx.com> - 2016-01-07 18:22 -0300
                                                  Re: references to DOM parts John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2016-01-08 10:08 +0000
                                    Re: references to DOM parts Joao Rodrigues <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com.br> - 2016-01-07 18:03 -0800
                          Re: references to DOM parts Dr J R Stockton <reply1600@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2016-01-04 21:00 +0000
                    Re: references to DOM parts "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2016-01-04 16:45 -0800
              Re: references to DOM parts Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-01-01 03:32 +0100
                Re: references to DOM parts Aleksandro <aleksandro@gmx.com> - 2016-01-01 02:56 -0300
                Re: references to DOM parts Luuk <luuk@invalid.lan> - 2016-01-03 16:56 +0100
                  Re: references to DOM parts Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-01-03 17:25 +0100
                    Re: references to DOM parts Luuk <luuk@invalid.lan> - 2016-01-03 18:19 +0100
                      Re: references to DOM parts Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-01-03 23:23 +0100
                        Re: references to DOM parts Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2016-01-03 22:28 +0000
                          Re: references to DOM parts Joao Rodrigues <groups_jr-1@yahoo.com.br> - 2016-01-04 09:09 -0200

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

#29132

On 03/01/2016 17:55, Aleksandro wrote:
> On 03/01/16 11:36, Mark - wrote:
>>> Joao Rodrigues wrote:
>>
>>> However it's been very difficult to stay here with a lunatic that
>>> tries to intimidate and let everyone down, depending on his sense of
>>> humour on that day. For instance, just after the midnight of January
>>> 1, instead of wishing a Happy New Year to the group, he responded to
>>> Aleksandro in a very arrogant and disrespectful manner. For me, that
>>> was a disturbing symptom of someone who doesn't have a healthy social
>>> life, a family, a girl-friend, whatever makes us feel more humans and
>>> tolerant with the others.
>>
>>
>> Dude, sticks and stones. If you continue to let this fellow have power
>> over you, he will have it. Move on, live a happy life, do not be the
>> "effect" of him. Be "cause" of your own well being.
>
> I think that here I speak for all the well behaved users here. It is not
> that we are personally worried at all about the channel troll, actually
> we could not care less. The problem is that after being “plonked” by the
> vast majority of users here and also considering how a lot of old users
> have left anyway, this individual seems himself practically alone so he
> can post and say anything, in many cases making newcomers ever mistake
> him for some sort of authority, which he obviously is not.
>

After some years reading all the foolishness, drivel and loads of self 
promoting spam written by the c.l.js resident troll, one may risk losing 
the faith in humanity, and end up thinking that a World War III is 
indeed necessary to save the planet.

-- 
Joao Rodrigues

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

#29142

Joao Rodrigues wrote:

> On 03/01/2016 17:55, Aleksandro wrote:
>> On 03/01/16 11:36, Mark - wrote:
>>>> Joao Rodrigues wrote:
>>>> However it's been very difficult to stay here with a lunatic that
>>>> tries to intimidate and let everyone down, depending on his sense of
>>>> humour on that day. For instance, just after the midnight of January
>>>> 1, instead of wishing a Happy New Year to the group, he responded to
>>>> Aleksandro in a very arrogant and disrespectful manner. For me, that
>>>> was a disturbing symptom of someone who doesn't have a healthy social
>>>> life, a family, a girl-friend, whatever makes us feel more humans and
>>>> tolerant with the others.
>>> Dude, sticks and stones. If you continue to let this fellow have power
>>> over you, he will have it. Move on, live a happy life, do not be the
>>> "effect" of him. Be "cause" of your own well being.
>> I think that here I speak for all the well behaved users here. It is not
>> that we are personally worried at all about the channel troll, actually
>> we could not care less. The problem is that after being “plonked” by the
>> vast majority of users here and also considering how a lot of old users
>> have left anyway, this individual seems himself practically alone so he
>> can post and say anything, in many cases making newcomers ever mistake
>> him for some sort of authority, which he obviously is not.
> 
> After some years reading all the foolishness, drivel and loads of self
> promoting spam written by the c.l.js resident troll, one may risk losing
> the faith in humanity, and end up thinking that a World War III is
> indeed necessary to save the planet.

| Great news! Thanks for taking the initiative in moving the c.l.js FAQ to 
| Github. Despite some occasional bickerings, I acknowledge your hard 
| work, commitment and efforts.

  –Joao Rodrigues in <news:n4mts9$5qt$1@speranza.aioe.org>

So you call the above “occasional bickerings”?  Or is it instead that you 
are such an obnoxious opportunist and hypocrite that you howl with the 
wolves whenever it appears to be of advantage?  It is easier to bash one 
person when you deem yourself to be in a group, is it not?  Coward.

All of you self-appointed “well-behaved users” quoted above, most of which 
have not contributed regularly here for more than a month, are so 
hypocritical and full of yourself, you do not even realize the amount of 
*real* spam that you are continuing to produce here.  While other people 
continue to stay on topic for the most part, *despite* your evasive 
maneuvers, deliberate misquotations and misinterpretations, and personal 
attacks.  Because you have actually nothing of importance to say, not 
regarding the topic of this newsgroup at any rate.  Just go away, *please*.

F'up2 poster
 
-- 
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]

#29146

On 01/04/2016 22:17, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> So you call the above “occasional bickerings”?  Or is it instead that you 
> are such an obnoxious opportunist and hypocrite that you howl with the 
> wolves whenever it appears to be of advantage?  It is easier to bash one 
> person when you deem yourself to be in a group, is it not?  Coward.
> 
> All of you self-appointed “well-behaved users” quoted above, most of which 
> have not contributed regularly here for more than a month, are so 
> hypocritical and full of yourself, you do not even realize the amount of 
> *real* spam that you are continuing to produce here.

That's quite ironic, when most of the noise in this group is directly
caused by you. You invariably pick some unimportant detail (the spelling
of JavaScript, the name of the poster, the length of the attribution
line or signature, their code formatting, etc...) and then berate and
belittle the poster in the most offensive and condescending way you can.

When will you finally get it? NOBODY GIVES A SHIT about irrelevant
details like that. We want to talk about JavaScript (not how it's
spelled), but your patronizing behavior makes that very difficult. It
also drives away people who have better things to do than argue with a
bully on the internet.

Judging from the responses in the last few weeks, there appears to be a
broad consensus that your rudeness and pedantry are not appreciated
(with the possible exception of Andrew Poulos, who for some reason still
appears to mistake arrogance for authority). A normal person would take
the hint and try to adjust their behavior. A troll, on the other hand,
would take it as encouragement. Which are you?

> While other people continue to stay on topic for the most part,
> *despite* your evasive maneuvers, deliberate misquotations and
> misinterpretations, and personal attacks.

Don't you think it's disingenious to complain about personal attacks,
while calling another person "an obnoxious opportunist and hypocrite"
and a "coward" in the very same message?

> Because you have actually nothing of importance to say, not regarding
> the topic of this newsgroup at any rate.  Just go away, *please*.

I personally value JR's contributions much more than your repetitive
drivel. Is there some problem with your killfile? Getting a little
crowded in there? If you don't want to read his posts, just put him on
ignore, and add me while you're at it.

> F'up2 poster

Ignored. You don't get to write something like that and be spared the
consequences.


- stefan

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

#29147

Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> wrote on 05 Jan 2016 in 
comp.lang.javascript:
> NOBODY GIVES A SHIT about irrelevant
> details like that. We want to talk about JavaScript 

Please Stefan, talk for yourself, don't talk for me or "the group".

As this is a discussion-group, assuming for other members is unnecessary,
assuming for ALL others is downright silly.

If you want to stage a private war with someone, 
please do it outside this NG.

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

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

#29149

In article <XnsA586A611DEDFCeejj99@194.109.6.166>, Evertjan.
<exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> wrote:

>Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> wrote on 05 Jan 2016 in 
>comp.lang.javascript:
>> NOBODY GIVES A SHIT about irrelevant
>> details like that. We want to talk about JavaScript 
>
>Please Stefan, talk for yourself, don't talk for me or "the group".
>
>As this is a discussion-group, assuming for other members is unnecessary,
>assuming for ALL others is downright silly.
>
>If you want to stage a private war with someone, 
>please do it outside this NG.

I, OTOH, applaud Stefan for his accurate and correct analysis. Done
much better than I could or have the patience for.

-- 
HAL 9000:    Dave.  Put down those Windows disks.  Dave.  DAVE!

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

#29151

Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote on 05 Jan 2016 in 
comp.lang.javascript:

> In article <XnsA586A611DEDFCeejj99@194.109.6.166>, Evertjan.
> <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> wrote:
> 
>>Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> wrote on 05 Jan 2016 in 
>>comp.lang.javascript:
>>> NOBODY GIVES A SHIT about irrelevant
>>> details like that. We want to talk about JavaScript 
>>
>>Please Stefan, talk for yourself, don't talk for me or "the group".
>>
>>As this is a discussion-group, assuming for other members is unnecessary,
>>assuming for ALL others is downright silly.
>>
>>If you want to stage a private war with someone, 
>>please do it outside this NG.
> 
> I, OTOH, applaud Stefan for his accurate and correct analysis. Done
> much better than I could or have the patience for.

Well, he did not lay any [accurate, correct or else] foundation 
about the stated defaecative obstipation of everybody.

I prefer to discuss my own bowel-movements.

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

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

#29162

On 01/05/2016 20:13, Evertjan. wrote:
>>>> NOBODY GIVES A SHIT about irrelevant
>>>> details like that. We want to talk about JavaScript 
>>>
>>> Please Stefan, talk for yourself, don't talk for me or "the group".
...
> I prefer to discuss my own bowel-movements.

I stand corrected. Now I know that at least one other person prefers to
discuss the spelling of JavaScript, the format of postings, and
apparently, his bowel movements.

Can I expect a thread about automatic colon withdrawals soon, rather
than automatic semicolon insertion?

- stefan

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

#29163

Stefan Weiss <krewecherl@gmail.com> wrote on 07 Jan 2016 in 
comp.lang.javascript:

> On 01/05/2016 20:13, Evertjan. wrote:
>>>>> NOBODY GIVES A SHIT about irrelevant
>>>>> details like that. We want to talk about JavaScript 
>>>>
>>>> Please Stefan, talk for yourself, don't talk for me or "the group".
> ...
>> I prefer to discuss my own bowel-movements.
> 
> I stand corrected. Now I know that at least one other person prefers to
> discuss the spelling of JavaScript, the format of postings, and
> apparently, his bowel movements.
> 
> Can I expect a thread about automatic colon withdrawals soon, rather
> than automatic semicolon insertion?

You will be excluded by reason of no body. 

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

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

#29165

Stefan Weiss wrote:

> On 01/05/2016 20:13, Evertjan. wrote:
>>>>> NOBODY GIVES A SHIT about irrelevant
>>>>> details like that. We want to talk about JavaScript
>>>> Please Stefan, talk for yourself, don't talk for me or "the group".
> ...
>> I prefer to discuss my own bowel-movements.
> 
> I stand corrected. Now I know that at least one other person prefers to
> discuss the spelling of JavaScript,

You still don’t get it, do you?  My (BTW *correct*) statement “There is no 
[single] Javascript [programming language]” (bracketed text implied or 
explained when the statement without it was challenged) was/is never 
primarily about the spelling.  It is about the misconceptions that people 
have acquired through attaining only half-knowledge as they got 
overconfident due to early success; half-knowledge that habitual use of 
invented terminology implies and disseminates.

> the format of postings,

This has never been more than an aside in my postings, and you know it.

-- 
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]

#29167

On Thu, 07 Jan 2016 18:41:42 +0100, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
<PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

  <snip>
>It is about the misconceptions that people 
>have acquired through attaining only half-knowledge as they got 
>overconfident due to early success; half-knowledge that habitual use of 
>invented terminology implies and disseminates.
  <snip>

<https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof>

  John

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

#29168

John Harris wrote:

> […] Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn […] wrote:
>> It is about the misconceptions that people have acquired through
>> attaining only half-knowledge as they got overconfident due to early
>> success; half-knowledge that habitual use of invented terminology
>> implies and disseminates.
> 
> <https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof>

<https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy>

-- 
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]

#29169

On 07/01/16 16:18, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> John Harris wrote:
> 
>> […] Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn […] wrote:
>>> It is about the misconceptions that people have acquired through
>>> attaining only half-knowledge as they got overconfident due to early
>>> success; half-knowledge that habitual use of invented terminology
>>> implies and disseminates.
>>
>> <https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof>
> 
> <https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy>

Thus the troll feels now immune. ;)

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

#29177

On Thu, 07 Jan 2016 20:18:48 +0100, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
<PointedEars@web.de> wrote:

>John Harris wrote:
>
>> […] Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn […] wrote:
>>> It is about the misconceptions that people have acquired through
>>> attaining only half-knowledge as they got overconfident due to early
>>> success; half-knowledge that habitual use of invented terminology
>>> implies and disseminates.
>> 
>> <https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof>
>
><https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy>

As Thomas Lahn said :
>You have been told this before: You need to *cite* your references, and to 
>*quote* the substantiating statements.

  John

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

#29174

On 5 January 2016 12:36:28 UTC-2, Stefan Weiss  wrote:
> On 01/04/2016 22:17, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> > So you call the above "occasional bickerings"?  Or is it instead that you 
> > are such an obnoxious opportunist and hypocrite that you howl with the 
> > wolves whenever it appears to be of advantage?  It is easier to bash one 
> > person when you deem yourself to be in a group, is it not?  Coward.
> > 
> > All of you self-appointed "well-behaved users" quoted above, most of which 
> > have not contributed regularly here for more than a month, are so 
> > hypocritical and full of yourself, you do not even realize the amount of 
> > *real* spam that you are continuing to produce here.
> 
> That's quite ironic, when most of the noise in this group is directly
> caused by you. You invariably pick some unimportant detail (the spelling
> of JavaScript, the name of the poster, the length of the attribution
> line or signature, their code formatting, etc...) and then berate and
> belittle the poster in the most offensive and condescending way you can.
> 
> When will you finally get it? NOBODY GIVES A SHIT about irrelevant
> details like that. We want to talk about JavaScript (not how it's
> spelled), but your patronizing behavior makes that very difficult. It
> also drives away people who have better things to do than argue with a
> bully on the internet.
> 
> Judging from the responses in the last few weeks, there appears to be a
> broad consensus that your rudeness and pedantry are not appreciated
> (with the possible exception of Andrew Poulos, who for some reason still
> appears to mistake arrogance for authority). A normal person would take
> the hint and try to adjust their behavior. A troll, on the other hand,
> would take it as encouragement. Which are you?
> 
> > While other people continue to stay on topic for the most part,
> > *despite* your evasive maneuvers, deliberate misquotations and
> > misinterpretations, and personal attacks.
> 
> Don't you think it's disingenious to complain about personal attacks,
> while calling another person "an obnoxious opportunist and hypocrite"
> and a "coward" in the very same message?
> 
> > Because you have actually nothing of importance to say, not regarding
> > the topic of this newsgroup at any rate.  Just go away, *please*.
> 
> I personally value JR's contributions much more than your repetitive
> drivel. Is there some problem with your killfile? Getting a little
> crowded in there? If you don't want to read his posts, just put him on
> ignore, and add me while you're at it.
> 
> > F'up2 poster
> 
> Ignored. You don't get to write something like that and be spared the
> consequences.
> 


Stefan, you deserve a double standing ovation.

--
Joao Rodrigues

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

#29144

In comp.lang.javascript message <cffc490b-1d31-4671-9115-04ce6f49f501@go
oglegroups.com>, Sun, 3 Jan 2016 03:32:26, Joao Rodrigues <groups_jr-
1@yahoo.com.br> posted:

>I feel that the majority of the participants in this group behave in an
> acceptable, sociable manner, as adults need to be.
>
>However it's been very difficult to stay here with a lunatic that tries to
> intimidate and let everyone down, depending on his sense of humour on that
> day.

Lahn is a technonerd with a defective personality.

He has the effect of driving many users, especially new ones, away from
this newsgroup and from others that he haunts.  Therefore, he is of
strongly negative net benefit.

-- 
 (c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK.  ¬@merlyn.demon.co.uk   Turnpike v6.05   MIME.
 Merlyn Web Site <                       > - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.

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

#29145

On Friday, January 1, 2016 at 12:30:13 AM UTC-6, Andrew Poulos wrote:
> On 1/01/2016 1:36 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> > Ex nonsenso quodlibet
> 
> I'm impressed by how many people can quote in Latin. Can you guys 
> actually speak/read/write Latin, or is there some website with quotes 
> that you draw upon, or are the quotes "commonly" known ones? ;-)

"Quidquid latine dictum, altum videtur" 
  -- anything said in Latin seems profound

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

#29084

Aleksandro wrote:

> On 31/12/15 15:19, Evertjan. wrote:
>> Aleksandro <aleksandro@gmx.com> wrote on 31 Dec 2015 in
>> comp.lang.javascript:
>>> On 31/12/15 11:15, JJ wrote:
>>>> It's like assigning a variable to the return value of removeChild()
>>>> then re-insert the node into the document later using appendChild() or
>>>> insertBefore(). Without saving a reference to the removed node, the
>>>> node would be a garbage.
          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
What is that supposed to mean?

>>> I think would apply the same rules as to any Javascript object.

Which would be, and where would you look it up?

>> Is the Javascript-object garbage-collection the same as the
>> DOM-tree-element one?

_element node_ in the _document_ tree, and no.
 
> DOM elements are normal Javascript objects, or should be.

Nonsense.

> Someone confirm please.

There is no “Javascript”, so there are no “Javascript objects” and no 
“Javascript-object garbage-collection” and so on.

Please get the basics right before you post, and use the correct terminology 
when you post.  There is enough nonsense about this topic on the Net 
already.

-- 
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]

#29086

On 31/12/15 23:32, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> Aleksandro wrote:
> 
>> On 31/12/15 15:19, Evertjan. wrote:
>>> Aleksandro <aleksandro@gmx.com> wrote on 31 Dec 2015 in
>>> comp.lang.javascript:
>>>> On 31/12/15 11:15, JJ wrote:
>>>>> It's like assigning a variable to the return value of removeChild()
>>>>> then re-insert the node into the document later using appendChild() or
>>>>> insertBefore(). Without saving a reference to the removed node, the
>>>>> node would be a garbage.
>           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> What is that supposed to mean?
> 
>>>> I think would apply the same rules as to any Javascript object.
> 
> Which would be, and where would you look it up?
> 
>>> Is the Javascript-object garbage-collection the same as the
>>> DOM-tree-element one?
> 
> _element node_ in the _document_ tree, and no.
>  
>> DOM elements are normal Javascript objects, or should be.
> 
> Nonsense.
> 
>> Someone confirm please.
> 
> There is no “Javascript”, so there are no “Javascript objects” and no 
> “Javascript-object garbage-collection” and so on.
> 
> Please get the basics right before you post, and use the correct terminology 
> when you post.  There is enough nonsense about this topic on the Net 
> already.

Hello, you are kindly invited to come get off from your little arrogance
buble for a bit so you can actually explain things to all the (in your
sole opinion) misinformed.

Regards.

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

#29119

On 01-01-16 03:32, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> There is no “Javascript”, so there are no “Javascript objects” and no
> “Javascript-object garbage-collection” and so on.


Ok now, while some of us are talking Latin in this group, i will tkae 
the liberty of quoting a Dutch website....

source:
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECMAScript

quoot from site:
ECMAScript is een scripttaal gedefinieerd door Ecma International 
(voorheen ECMA). ECMAScript wordt zeer veel gebruikt, met name in de 
implementaties van ActionScript, JavaScript en JScript.

De basis voor ECMAScript was JavaScript,
end-of-quoot


google-translated too English:
ECMAScript is a scripting language defined by Ecma International 
(formerly ECMA). ECMAScript is widely used, particularly in the 
implementation of ActionScript, JavaScript and JScript.

The basis for ECMAScript was JavaScript,
end-of-translation

(and i refuse to give you the Latin translation...!)


@Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn:
I think , by now, everyone reading in here KNOWS abou the claims you make..

But why do YOU think they keep on doing it wrong?

JavaScript is the term used for the most-used / well-know implementation 
of ECMAScript.

Obviously there is more than 1 implementation of this JavaScript, but 
most of the times this is irrelevant to the question asked...

Therefore, there is NO point in denying the existence of JavaScript

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

#29121

</killfile>

The anti-social incompetent address munger “Luuk”, who stops by here only 
every other year, blathered nonsense again:

> On 01-01-16 03:32, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> There is no “Javascript”, so there are no “Javascript objects” and no
>> “Javascript-object garbage-collection” and so on.
> 
> Ok now, while some of us are talking Latin in this group, i will tkae
> the liberty of quoting a Dutch website....

You are not quoting simply “a Dutch website”, you are quoting the Dutch 
version of Wikipedia, which is a wiki – editable by virtually everyone, 
including *incompetent people*.  The record shows that Wikipedia articles on 
the topic are flawed.  The article you are quoting is no exception of that.
 
> source:
> https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECMAScript
> 
> quoot from site:
> ECMAScript is een scripttaal gedefinieerd door Ecma International
> (voorheen ECMA).

So far, so good.

> ECMAScript wordt zeer veel gebruikt, met name in de
> implementaties van ActionScript, JavaScript en JScript.

The second part is wrong.  ActionScript, JavaScript(s), and JScript are 
implementations of ECMAScript, not merely different names for it.  

Implementations of ECMAScript (also: ECMAScript implementations) differ from 
ECMAScript in that they exhibit *implementation-dependent behavior*; they 
are allowed to do so and still be called “conforming” within the boundaries 
defined by the standard (section “Conformance”).

As a result, ECMAScript implementations not only differ from ECMAScript; 
they *differ from one another*.

For example, ActionScript 2.0+ (which implement a proposal by Netscape to 
TC39 for ECMAScript Edition 4 that was later abandoned) have classes as in 
class-based inheritance, while more recent JavaScripts (Mozilla JavaScript 
and Google V8 JavaScript) have classes in a very different way, with 
different syntax.

ActionScript 2.0+ also supports static type-checking (with types such as int 
and double), while those JavaScripts support dynamic type-checking (with 
only one numeric data type, Number).

Mozilla JavaScript has the “let” statement since several years/versions, 
Google V8 JavaScript has gotten it only recently (with the version that 
implements this ECMAScript 2015 feature), and then it only works in the 
latter in strict mode.

*And so on.*

> De basis voor ECMAScript was JavaScript,

Wrong.  The basis for ECMAScript were *Netscape* JavaScript 1.1 *and* 
Microsoft JScript 1.0.  It says so *in every Edition of the ECMAScript 
Language Specification* (the versions are not mentioned there explicitly, 
you have to derive that from the corresponding version history).

> JavaScript is the term used for the most-used / well-know implementation
> of ECMAScript.

Wrong again.  There is not one JavaScript now, there are several, by several 
vendors.
 
> Obviously there is more than 1 implementation of this JavaScript,

Wrong again.  Those are not implementations of JavaScript, but of 
ECMAScript.

All of the above can be found in the ECMAScript Support Matrix and in my 
thesis (always in my sig), if one only *cared to read* instead of catering 
to one’s and one’s fellows’ misconceptions.

> Therefore, there is NO point in denying the existence of JavaScript

And *nobody* did that.  Learn to read.

<killfile>

-- 
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