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

Groups > comp.lang.php > #11595 > unrolled thread

checking for audio playing ???

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

Contents

  checking for audio playing ??? richard <noreply@example.com> - 2013-10-27 10:58 -0400
    Re: checking for audio playing ??? Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-10-27 16:45 +0100
      Re: checking for audio playing ??? richard <noreply@example.com> - 2013-10-27 12:01 -0400
    Re: checking for audio playing ??? Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-10-27 17:53 +0000
      Re: checking for audio playing ??? richard <noreply@example.com> - 2013-10-27 14:24 -0400
        Re: checking for audio playing ??? Doug Miller <doug_at_milmac_dot_com@example.com> - 2013-10-27 18:38 +0000
        Re: checking for audio playing ??? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2013-10-27 14:43 -0400
          Re: checking for audio playing ??? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-10-28 03:22 +0100
            Re: checking for audio playing ??? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-10-28 05:49 -0400
            Re: checking for audio playing ??? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2013-10-28 08:11 -0400
              Re: checking for audio playing ??? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-10-28 14:37 +0100
              Re: checking for audio playing ??? "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <a.nony.mous@example.invalid> - 2013-10-28 13:49 +0000
              Re: checking for audio playing ??? Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-10-28 10:01 -0400
              Re: checking for audio playing ??? Scott Johnson <noonehome@chalupasworld.com> - 2013-10-28 11:36 -0700
              Re: checking for audio playing ??? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2013-10-28 21:29 -0400
                Re: checking for audio playing ??? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-10-29 12:18 +0100
                  cr Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2013-10-31 23:21 -0400
                    Re: cr Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-11-03 15:29 +0100
                      Re: cr Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-11-03 09:34 -0500
                      Re: cr Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2013-11-03 15:18 -0500
              Re: checking for audio playing ??? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-10-29 20:12 +0100
                Re: checking for audio playing ??? Doug Miller <doug_at_milmac_dot_com@example.com> - 2013-10-29 20:21 +0000
            Re: checking for audio playing ??? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-10-29 20:10 +0100
              server-side vs.client-side (was: checking for audio playing ???) Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-10-29 21:45 +0100
                Re: server-side vs.client-side Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-10-29 20:54 -0400
                  Re: server-side vs.client-side Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-10-30 03:18 +0100
                    Re: server-side vs.client-side Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-10-29 22:31 -0400
                    Re: server-side vs.client-side Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-10-30 09:20 +0100
                      Re: server-side vs.client-side Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-10-30 19:04 +0100
                        Re: server-side vs.client-side Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-10-30 14:58 -0400
                          Re: server-side vs.client-side Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-10-30 20:54 +0100
                            Re: server-side vs.client-side Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-10-30 16:21 -0400
                              Re: server-side vs.client-side Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-10-30 21:55 +0100
                                Re: server-side vs.client-side Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-10-30 17:07 -0400
                            Re: server-side vs.client-side Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-10-31 09:40 +0100
                              Re: server-side vs.client-side Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2013-10-31 23:03 +0100
                                Re: server-side vs.client-side Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-10-31 20:38 -0400
                                Re: server-side vs.client-side Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-11-02 17:57 +0100
                                  Re: server-side vs.client-side Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-11-02 19:36 +0100
                                    Re: server-side vs.client-side The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-11-02 18:44 +0000
                                    Re: server-side vs.client-side Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-11-03 00:28 +0000
                                  Re: server-side vs.client-side Doug Miller <doug_at_milmac_dot_com@example.com> - 2013-11-02 19:01 +0000
                                  Re: server-side vs.client-side Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-11-02 21:40 -0400
                              Re: server-side vs.client-side Michael Vilain <vilain@NOspamcop.net> - 2013-11-01 09:53 -0700
                                Re: server-side vs.client-side Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-11-01 13:53 -0400
                                  Re: server-side vs.client-side Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2013-11-01 21:10 +0000
                                    Re: server-side vs.client-side The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-11-01 22:25 +0000
                                      Re: server-side vs.client-side Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2013-11-01 22:29 +0000
                                      Re: server-side vs.client-side Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-11-01 20:37 -0400
                                    Re: server-side vs.client-side Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-11-02 01:26 +0100
                                Re: server-side vs.client-side The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-11-01 18:37 +0000
                                Re: server-side vs.client-side Stefan+Usenet@Froehlich.Priv.at (Stefan Froehlich) - 2013-11-01 19:19 +0000
                                Re: server-side vs.client-side Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-11-02 01:24 +0100
                                Re: server-side vs.client-side Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-11-02 17:46 +0100
                                  Re: server-side vs.client-side Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2013-11-02 15:41 -0400
                                    Re: server-side vs.client-side Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2013-11-02 21:37 +0000
                                    Re: server-side vs.client-side Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-11-03 10:48 +0100
                                      Re: server-side vs.client-side Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2013-11-03 10:28 +0000
                                        Re: server-side vs.client-side Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-11-05 11:15 +0100
                                          Re: server-side vs.client-side Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2013-11-05 12:47 +0000
                                    Re: server-side vs.client-side Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-11-03 14:16 +0100
                                      Re: server-side vs.client-side Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2013-11-03 16:00 +0000
                                        Re: server-side vs.client-side Chuck Anderson <cycletourist@invalid.invalid> - 2013-11-03 14:52 -0700
                                          Re: server-side vs.client-side Chuck Anderson <cycletourist@invalid.invalid> - 2013-11-03 23:19 -0700
                                            Re: server-side vs.client-side Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2013-11-04 18:02 +0000
                Re: server-side vs.client-side Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-10-30 09:09 +0100
        Re: checking for audio playing ??? Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2013-10-28 15:23 +0000
          Re: checking for audio playing ??? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-10-28 16:56 +0000
    Re: checking for audio playing ??? Doug Miller <doug_at_milmac_dot_com@example.com> - 2013-10-27 18:22 +0000
    Re: checking for audio playing ??? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2013-10-28 20:02 +0100

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

#11631

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn, 2013-10-28 14:34:

> Richard Damon wrote:
> 
>> On 10/27/13, 10:22 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>> Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> […] The one thing that is fairly certain is that the
>>>> player will almost certainly NOT be written in PHP,
>>>
>>> That much is true.
>>>
>>>> as PHP is normally a server side language, and few clients will
>>>> understand it.
>>>
>>> A common misconception.  *No* programming language is “normally” either
>>> “server-side” or “client-side”.
>>
>> Clearly a falsehood.
> 
> Clearly you have not read.

You neither - or din't you understand this statement:

Note that "normal" does not mean exclusively, but only means in most
common usage.

>> I would expect that at least 95% of PHP executions
>> are done via mod-php or php-cgi in response to a http request, [tl;dr]
> 
> So even by your standards there are 5% left for “client-side” applications.

So what? Does this make PHP a language is is *not* most of the time used
for "server side" stuff?


-- 
Arno Welzel
http://arnowelzel.de
http://de-rec-fahrrad.de

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

#11635

Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> wrote in news:527008B0.8020201@arnowelzel.de:

> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn, 2013-10-28 14:34:
> 
>> Richard Damon wrote:
>> 
>>> On 10/27/13, 10:22 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>>> Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> […] The one thing that is fairly certain is that the
>>>>> player will almost certainly NOT be written in PHP,
>>>>
>>>> That much is true.
>>>>
>>>>> as PHP is normally a server side language, and few clients will
>>>>> understand it.
>>>>
>>>> A common misconception.  *No* programming language is “normally” either
>>>> “server-side” or “client-side”.
>>>
>>> Clearly a falsehood.
>> 
>> Clearly you have not read.
> 
> You neither - or din't you understand this statement:
> 
> Note that "normal" does not mean exclusively, but only means in most
> common usage.
> 
>>> I would expect that at least 95% of PHP executions
>>> are done via mod-php or php-cgi in response to a http request, [tl;dr]
>> 
>> So even by your standards there are 5% left for “client-side” applications.
> 
> So what? Does this make PHP a language is is *not* most of the time used
> for "server side" stuff?
> 
Arno, since you're coming from a .de top-level domain, perhaps you should write to 
PointedHead auf Deutsch. He'd [probably] understand you better: that's his native 
language, not English -- and as someone whose native language *is* English, I have 
observed that PointedHead does not understand it as well as he thinks he does. This 
appears to an example of such.

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

#11630

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn, 2013-10-28 03:22:

> Richard Damon wrote:
> 
>> […] The one thing that is fairly certain is that the
>> player will almost certainly NOT be written in PHP,
> 
> That much is true.
> 
>> as PHP is normally a server side language, and few clients will understand
>> it.
> 
> A common misconception.  *No* programming language is “normally” either 
> “server-side” or “client-side”.

Historically PHP had *always* been targeted to be used on a server to
generate output for one or more clients delivered via HTTP. That's the
reason why there are modules for Apache, why PHP supports CGI and why
literally every book about PHP teaches how to create websites using PHP
and not how to build desktop applications using PHP.

Just because it is technically possible to set up a PHP runtime
environment literally anywhere and <http://gtk.php.net/> exists it does
not make PHP a language which is also be used on "client side". BTW -
the last update of <http://gtk.php.net/> dates back to August 2010...

The opposite is true for ECMAScript which is fact used "server side" and
"client side" as well also in real applications.

But for sure you can name some popular PHP based desktop applications
that prove it wrong, that PHP is *usually* only used "server side" - can
you?


-- 
Arno Welzel
http://arnowelzel.de
http://de-rec-fahrrad.de

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

#11636 — server-side vs.client-side (was: checking for audio playing ???)

Arno Welzel wrote:

> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn, 2013-10-28 03:22:
> 
>> Richard Damon wrote:
>>
>>> […] The one thing that is fairly certain is that the
>>> player will almost certainly NOT be written in PHP,
>>
>> That much is true.
>>
>>> as PHP is normally a server side language, and few clients will understand
>>> it.
>>
>> A common misconception.  *No* programming language is “normally” either 
>> “server-side” or “client-side”.
> 
> Historically PHP had *always* been targeted to be used on a server to
> generate output for one or more clients delivered via HTTP. That's the
> reason why there are modules for Apache, why PHP supports CGI and why
> literally every book about PHP teaches how to create websites using PHP
> and not how to build desktop applications using PHP.
> 
> Just because it is technically possible to set up a PHP runtime
> environment literally anywhere and <http://gtk.php.net/> exists it does
> not make PHP a language which is also be used on "client side". BTW -
> the last update of <http://gtk.php.net/> dates back to August 2010...
> 
> The opposite is true for ECMAScript which is fact used "server side" and
> "client side" as well also in real applications.
> 
> But for sure you can name some popular PHP based desktop applications
> that prove it wrong, that PHP is *usually* only used "server side" - can
> you?

It seems you're not taken into account command line applications, for
which PHP is well suited.[1]  These often run outside of any
client-server context, such as phing and phpunit (which I am using
"every" day), for instance.

[1] <http://php.net/manual/en/features.commandline.php>

-- 
Christoph M. Becker

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

#11641 — Re: server-side vs.client-side

On 10/29/2013 4:45 PM, Christoph Michael Becker wrote:
> Arno Welzel wrote:
>
>> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn, 2013-10-28 03:22:
>>
>>> Richard Damon wrote:
>>>
>>>> […] The one thing that is fairly certain is that the
>>>> player will almost certainly NOT be written in PHP,
>>>
>>> That much is true.
>>>
>>>> as PHP is normally a server side language, and few clients will understand
>>>> it.
>>>
>>> A common misconception.  *No* programming language is “normally” either
>>> “server-side” or “client-side”.
>>
>> Historically PHP had *always* been targeted to be used on a server to
>> generate output for one or more clients delivered via HTTP. That's the
>> reason why there are modules for Apache, why PHP supports CGI and why
>> literally every book about PHP teaches how to create websites using PHP
>> and not how to build desktop applications using PHP.
>>
>> Just because it is technically possible to set up a PHP runtime
>> environment literally anywhere and <http://gtk.php.net/> exists it does
>> not make PHP a language which is also be used on "client side". BTW -
>> the last update of <http://gtk.php.net/> dates back to August 2010...
>>
>> The opposite is true for ECMAScript which is fact used "server side" and
>> "client side" as well also in real applications.
>>
>> But for sure you can name some popular PHP based desktop applications
>> that prove it wrong, that PHP is *usually* only used "server side" - can
>> you?
>
> It seems you're not taken into account command line applications, for
> which PHP is well suited.[1]  These often run outside of any
> client-server context, such as phing and phpunit (which I am using
> "every" day), for instance.
>
> [1] <http://php.net/manual/en/features.commandline.php>
>

Sure, there are command line applications.  But what percentage of the 
PHP scripts out there fall into this case?

You're as bad as Pointed Head.  You don't understand what the term 
"Normal" means.  Maybe you're in the same alternate universe he is.

-- 
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

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

#11647 — Re: server-side vs.client-side

Jerry Stuckle wrote:

> On 10/29/2013 4:45 PM, Christoph Michael Becker wrote:
>> Arno Welzel wrote:
>>
>>> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn, 2013-10-28 03:22:
>>>
>>>> Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> […] The one thing that is fairly certain is that the
>>>>> player will almost certainly NOT be written in PHP,
>>>>
>>>> That much is true.
>>>>
>>>>> as PHP is normally a server side language, and few clients will
>>>>> understand
>>>>> it.
>>>>
>>>> A common misconception.  *No* programming language is “normally” either
>>>> “server-side” or “client-side”.
>>>
>>> Historically PHP had *always* been targeted to be used on a server to
>>> generate output for one or more clients delivered via HTTP. That's the
>>> reason why there are modules for Apache, why PHP supports CGI and why
>>> literally every book about PHP teaches how to create websites using PHP
>>> and not how to build desktop applications using PHP.
>>>
>>> Just because it is technically possible to set up a PHP runtime
>>> environment literally anywhere and <http://gtk.php.net/> exists it does
>>> not make PHP a language which is also be used on "client side". BTW -
>>> the last update of <http://gtk.php.net/> dates back to August 2010...
>>>
>>> The opposite is true for ECMAScript which is fact used "server side" and
>>> "client side" as well also in real applications.
>>>
>>> But for sure you can name some popular PHP based desktop applications
>>> that prove it wrong, that PHP is *usually* only used "server side" - can
>>> you?
>>
>> It seems you're not taken into account command line applications, for
>> which PHP is well suited.[1]  These often run outside of any
>> client-server context, such as phing and phpunit (which I am using
>> "every" day), for instance.
>>
>> [1] <http://php.net/manual/en/features.commandline.php>
>>
> 
> Sure, there are command line applications.  But what percentage of the
> PHP scripts out there fall into this case?

Thomas said (see above for reference):

| *No* programming language is “normally” either
| “server-side” or “client-side”.

Pointing out a single PHP application that runs neither "server-side"
nor "client-side" proves this statement wrt. PHP (that doesn't prove the
argument, though, but one can easily imagine any programming language to
be used outside a client-server context).  I pointed out two such
applications.

> You're as bad as Pointed Head.  You don't understand what the term
> "Normal" means.  Maybe you're in the same alternate universe he is.

You may want to reconsider this statement. :)

-- 
Christoph M. Becker

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

#11648 — Re: server-side vs.client-side

On 10/29/2013 10:18 PM, Christoph Michael Becker wrote:
> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>
>> On 10/29/2013 4:45 PM, Christoph Michael Becker wrote:
>>> Arno Welzel wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn, 2013-10-28 03:22:
>>>>
>>>>> Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> […] The one thing that is fairly certain is that the
>>>>>> player will almost certainly NOT be written in PHP,
>>>>>
>>>>> That much is true.
>>>>>
>>>>>> as PHP is normally a server side language, and few clients will
>>>>>> understand
>>>>>> it.
>>>>>
>>>>> A common misconception.  *No* programming language is “normally” either
>>>>> “server-side” or “client-side”.
>>>>
>>>> Historically PHP had *always* been targeted to be used on a server to
>>>> generate output for one or more clients delivered via HTTP. That's the
>>>> reason why there are modules for Apache, why PHP supports CGI and why
>>>> literally every book about PHP teaches how to create websites using PHP
>>>> and not how to build desktop applications using PHP.
>>>>
>>>> Just because it is technically possible to set up a PHP runtime
>>>> environment literally anywhere and <http://gtk.php.net/> exists it does
>>>> not make PHP a language which is also be used on "client side". BTW -
>>>> the last update of <http://gtk.php.net/> dates back to August 2010...
>>>>
>>>> The opposite is true for ECMAScript which is fact used "server side" and
>>>> "client side" as well also in real applications.
>>>>
>>>> But for sure you can name some popular PHP based desktop applications
>>>> that prove it wrong, that PHP is *usually* only used "server side" - can
>>>> you?
>>>
>>> It seems you're not taken into account command line applications, for
>>> which PHP is well suited.[1]  These often run outside of any
>>> client-server context, such as phing and phpunit (which I am using
>>> "every" day), for instance.
>>>
>>> [1] <http://php.net/manual/en/features.commandline.php>
>>>
>>
>> Sure, there are command line applications.  But what percentage of the
>> PHP scripts out there fall into this case?
>
> Thomas said (see above for reference):
>
> | *No* programming language is “normally” either
> | “server-side” or “client-side”.
>
> Pointing out a single PHP application that runs neither "server-side"
> nor "client-side" proves this statement wrt. PHP (that doesn't prove the
> argument, though, but one can easily imagine any programming language to
> be used outside a client-server context).  I pointed out two such
> applications.
>

"Normal" does not mean ALWAYS.  It means "usual usage", i.e. "more than 
50% of the time".  The statement is correct.  You are not.

>> You're as bad as Pointed Head.  You don't understand what the term
>> "Normal" means.  Maybe you're in the same alternate universe he is.
>
> You may want to reconsider this statement. :)
>

Not at all.  I stand by it completely.

-- 
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

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

#11654 — Re: server-side vs.client-side

Christoph Michael Becker, 2013-10-30 03:18:

> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
[...]
>> Sure, there are command line applications.  But what percentage of the
>> PHP scripts out there fall into this case?
> 
> Thomas said (see above for reference):
> 
> | *No* programming language is “normally” either
> | “server-side” or “client-side”.
> 
> Pointing out a single PHP application that runs neither "server-side"
> nor "client-side" proves this statement wrt. PHP (that doesn't prove the
> argument, though, but one can easily imagine any programming language to
> be used outside a client-server context).  I pointed out two such
> applications.

Ok - then you and Thomas would see this statement in the same manner:

"Screw drivers are normally used to tighten or loosen screws"

And you would point out, that a screw driver can also be used to stir a
cup of coffee or as a lever to open the lid of a can - so it is wrong to
assume that a screw driver is "normally" a tool to handle screws.

Well - yes - i'm exaggerating a bit. But hopefully you will get the point.

Even if it is *also* possible to use PHP in different ways and not just
as a scripting language in web servers it is easier for beginners to
*define* it as a "server side" language in contrast to JavaScript which
is usually used on "client side" within the browser, since most PHP
applications in the real world *are* this way.

Just remember the questions in this newsgroup if PHP can determine an
audio file playing in the browser (and some other similar questions) -
this confusion also comes from statements like yours and Thomas which
may be correct in technical terms - but it doesn't help people with
lesser knowledge and only increases the confusion about concepts and the
different aspects of web based applications. You have to separate these
two sides of server and client and consider carefully what things happen
on which side.


-- 
Arno Welzel
http://arnowelzel.de
http://de-rec-fahrrad.de

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

#11659 — Re: server-side vs.client-side

Arno Welzel wrote:

> Christoph Michael Becker, 2013-10-30 03:18:
> 
>> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> [...]
>>> Sure, there are command line applications.  But what percentage of the
>>> PHP scripts out there fall into this case?
>>
>> Thomas said (see above for reference):
>>
>> | *No* programming language is “normally” either
>> | “server-side” or “client-side”.
>>
>> Pointing out a single PHP application that runs neither "server-side"
>> nor "client-side" proves this statement wrt. PHP (that doesn't prove the
>> argument, though, but one can easily imagine any programming language to
>> be used outside a client-server context).  I pointed out two such
>> applications.
> 
> Ok - then you and Thomas would see this statement in the same manner:
>
> "Screw drivers are normally used to tighten or loosen screws"

No.  To stick with the screwdriver metaphor, Thomas' statement would be:

"No screwdriver is "normally" either used to tighten or to loosen screws."

And that one is true, isn't it.

> And you would point out, that a screw driver can also be used to stir a
> cup of coffee or as a lever to open the lid of a can - so it is wrong to
> assume that a screw driver is "normally" a tool to handle screws.
> 
> Well - yes - i'm exaggerating a bit. But hopefully you will get the point.

I had already gotten this point.

> Even if it is *also* possible to use PHP in different ways and not just
> as a scripting language in web servers it is easier for beginners to
> *define* it as a "server side" language in contrast to JavaScript which
> is usually used on "client side" within the browser, since most PHP
> applications in the real world *are* this way.

This newsgroup is not espicially aimed to beginners.

> Just remember the questions in this newsgroup if PHP can determine an
> audio file playing in the browser (and some other similar questions) -
> this confusion also comes from statements like yours and Thomas which
> may be correct in technical terms - but it doesn't help people with
> lesser knowledge and only increases the confusion about concepts and the
> different aspects of web based applications. You have to separate these
> two sides of server and client and consider carefully what things happen
> on which side.

I had already posted this in reply to the OP in
<526d351e$0$9523$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>

-- 
Christoph M. Becker

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

#11661 — Re: server-side vs.client-side

On 10/30/2013 2:04 PM, Christoph Michael Becker wrote:
> Arno Welzel wrote:
>
>> Christoph Michael Becker, 2013-10-30 03:18:
>>
>>> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>> [...]
>>>> Sure, there are command line applications.  But what percentage of the
>>>> PHP scripts out there fall into this case?
>>>
>>> Thomas said (see above for reference):
>>>
>>> | *No* programming language is “normally” either
>>> | “server-side” or “client-side”.
>>>
>>> Pointing out a single PHP application that runs neither "server-side"
>>> nor "client-side" proves this statement wrt. PHP (that doesn't prove the
>>> argument, though, but one can easily imagine any programming language to
>>> be used outside a client-server context).  I pointed out two such
>>> applications.
>>
>> Ok - then you and Thomas would see this statement in the same manner:
>>
>> "Screw drivers are normally used to tighten or loosen screws"
>
> No.  To stick with the screwdriver metaphor, Thomas' statement would be:
>
> "No screwdriver is "normally" either used to tighten or to loosen screws."
>
> And that one is true, isn't it.
>
>> And you would point out, that a screw driver can also be used to stir a
>> cup of coffee or as a lever to open the lid of a can - so it is wrong to
>> assume that a screw driver is "normally" a tool to handle screws.
>>
>> Well - yes - i'm exaggerating a bit. But hopefully you will get the point.
>
> I had already gotten this point.
>
>> Even if it is *also* possible to use PHP in different ways and not just
>> as a scripting language in web servers it is easier for beginners to
>> *define* it as a "server side" language in contrast to JavaScript which
>> is usually used on "client side" within the browser, since most PHP
>> applications in the real world *are* this way.
>
> This newsgroup is not espicially aimed to beginners.
>
>> Just remember the questions in this newsgroup if PHP can determine an
>> audio file playing in the browser (and some other similar questions) -
>> this confusion also comes from statements like yours and Thomas which
>> may be correct in technical terms - but it doesn't help people with
>> lesser knowledge and only increases the confusion about concepts and the
>> different aspects of web based applications. You have to separate these
>> two sides of server and client and consider carefully what things happen
>> on which side.
>
> I had already posted this in reply to the OP in
> <526d351e$0$9523$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
>

Christopher,

One question - since both you and Thomas seem to be from Germany, and 
have the same misunderstanding of the word "normally", what does 
"normally" translate to in German?  What does it mean?

-- 
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

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

#11662 — Re: server-side vs.client-side

Jerry Stuckle wrote:

> One question - since both you and Thomas seem to be from Germany, and
> have the same misunderstanding of the word "normally", what does
> "normally" translate to in German?  What does it mean?

In Germany it is "normalerweise"/"üblicherweise", what means as much
usually.  Anyway, a misunderstanding of the term "normally" is not the
problem here for me.  In my opinion, it is correct to state: "PHP is
normally (usually, most often etc.) used on a server (for server-side
programming)."

It is as well correct to state: "No programming language is normally
either server-side or client-side."  Otherwise it would mean, that there
are programming languages that couldn't be used outside of a
client-server context.

-- 
Christoph M. Becker

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

#11664 — Re: server-side vs.client-side

On 10/30/2013 3:54 PM, Christoph Michael Becker wrote:
> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>
>> One question - since both you and Thomas seem to be from Germany, and
>> have the same misunderstanding of the word "normally", what does
>> "normally" translate to in German?  What does it mean?
>
> In Germany it is "normalerweise"/"üblicherweise", what means as much
> usually.  Anyway, a misunderstanding of the term "normally" is not the
> problem here for me.  In my opinion, it is correct to state: "PHP is
> normally (usually, most often etc.) used on a server (for server-side
> programming)."
>
> It is as well correct to state: "No programming language is normally
> either server-side or client-side."  Otherwise it would mean, that there
> are programming languages that couldn't be used outside of a
> client-server context.
>

But "normally" in English doesn't mean it can't be used otherwise - it 
just means most of the time it is not.

For instance, people "normally" drive their cars on roads.  But that 
does not mean they can't take them off-road (obviously the conditions 
must be right or you get stuck :) ).  As an example, Daytona Beach, 
Florida has very hard packed sand.  It is not at all unusual to see 
people driving regular street cars on the beach.

-- 
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

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

#11665 — Re: server-side vs.client-side

Jerry Stuckle wrote:

> On 10/30/2013 3:54 PM, Christoph Michael Becker wrote:
>> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>
>>> One question - since both you and Thomas seem to be from Germany, and
>>> have the same misunderstanding of the word "normally", what does
>>> "normally" translate to in German?  What does it mean?
>>
>> In Germany it is "normalerweise"/"üblicherweise", what means as much
>> usually.  Anyway, a misunderstanding of the term "normally" is not the
>> problem here for me.  In my opinion, it is correct to state: "PHP is
>> normally (usually, most often etc.) used on a server (for server-side
>> programming)."
>>
>> It is as well correct to state: "No programming language is normally
>> either server-side or client-side."  Otherwise it would mean, that there
>> are programming languages that couldn't be used outside of a
>> client-server context.
>>
> 
> But "normally" in English doesn't mean it can't be used otherwise - it
> just means most of the time it is not.

That is the same in German.  However, one *might* argue that "normally"
stems from "norm", and so should be used only in this strict sense.  I
do not, and have not done.

> For instance, people "normally" drive their cars on roads.  But that
> does not mean they can't take them off-road (obviously the conditions
> must be right or you get stuck :) ).  As an example, Daytona Beach,
> Florida has very hard packed sand.  It is not at all unusual to see
> people driving regular street cars on the beach.

So one may say: "No car is normally either driven on a road or on a
beach".  Besides that a car might be driven on grassland (the point I
had already made explicit), it may be driven on a road as well as on a
beach (not simultaneously, though, but the same programming language may
well be used simultaneously on the server as well as on the client).

-- 
Christoph M. Becker

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

#11666 — Re: server-side vs.client-side

On 10/30/2013 4:55 PM, Christoph Michael Becker wrote:
> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>
>> On 10/30/2013 3:54 PM, Christoph Michael Becker wrote:
>>> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>>
>>>> One question - since both you and Thomas seem to be from Germany, and
>>>> have the same misunderstanding of the word "normally", what does
>>>> "normally" translate to in German?  What does it mean?
>>>
>>> In Germany it is "normalerweise"/"üblicherweise", what means as much
>>> usually.  Anyway, a misunderstanding of the term "normally" is not the
>>> problem here for me.  In my opinion, it is correct to state: "PHP is
>>> normally (usually, most often etc.) used on a server (for server-side
>>> programming)."
>>>
>>> It is as well correct to state: "No programming language is normally
>>> either server-side or client-side."  Otherwise it would mean, that there
>>> are programming languages that couldn't be used outside of a
>>> client-server context.
>>>
>>
>> But "normally" in English doesn't mean it can't be used otherwise - it
>> just means most of the time it is not.
>
> That is the same in German.  However, one *might* argue that "normally"
> stems from "norm", and so should be used only in this strict sense.  I
> do not, and have not done.
>
>> For instance, people "normally" drive their cars on roads.  But that
>> does not mean they can't take them off-road (obviously the conditions
>> must be right or you get stuck :) ).  As an example, Daytona Beach,
>> Florida has very hard packed sand.  It is not at all unusual to see
>> people driving regular street cars on the beach.
>
> So one may say: "No car is normally either driven on a road or on a
> beach".  Besides that a car might be driven on grassland (the point I
> had already made explicit), it may be driven on a road as well as on a
> beach (not simultaneously, though, but the same programming language may
> well be used simultaneously on the server as well as on the client).
>

No, at least in English, that would not be correct, because cars are 
driven on roads probably > 99% of the time (at least in the U.S.).  That 
is their "normal usage".



-- 
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

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

#11670 — Re: server-side vs.client-side

Christoph Michael Becker, 2013-10-30 20:54:

> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> 
>> One question - since both you and Thomas seem to be from Germany, and
>> have the same misunderstanding of the word "normally", what does
>> "normally" translate to in German?  What does it mean?
> 
> In Germany it is "normalerweise"/"üblicherweise", what means as much
> usually.  Anyway, a misunderstanding of the term "normally" is not the
> problem here for me.  In my opinion, it is correct to state: "PHP is
> normally (usually, most often etc.) used on a server (for server-side
> programming)."
> 
> It is as well correct to state: "No programming language is normally
> either server-side or client-side."  Otherwise it would mean, that there
> are programming languages that couldn't be used outside of a
> client-server context.

Exactly *this* is the wrong assumption, what "normally" means in this
context. It does *NOT* mean that a language can *never* be used in other
ways - it only says that is the the most common use of it.


-- 
Arno Welzel
http://arnowelzel.de
http://de-rec-fahrrad.de

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

#11677 — Re: server-side vs.client-side

Arno Welzel wrote:

> Christoph Michael Becker, 2013-10-30 20:54:
> 
>> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>
>>> One question - since both you and Thomas seem to be from Germany, and
>>> have the same misunderstanding of the word "normally", what does
>>> "normally" translate to in German?  What does it mean?
>>
>> In Germany it is "normalerweise"/"üblicherweise", what means as much
>> usually.  Anyway, a misunderstanding of the term "normally" is not the
>> problem here for me.  In my opinion, it is correct to state: "PHP is
>> normally (usually, most often etc.) used on a server (for server-side
>> programming)."
>>
>> It is as well correct to state: "No programming language is normally
>> either server-side or client-side."  Otherwise it would mean, that there
>> are programming languages that couldn't be used outside of a
>> client-server context.
> 
> Exactly *this* is the wrong assumption, what "normally" means in this
> context. It does *NOT* mean that a language can *never* be used in other
> ways - it only says that is the the most common use of it.

I thought there is the same difference between

  "No programming language is normally either server-side or
   client-side."

and

  "No programming language is either normally server-side
   or normally client-side."

as it is in German.  Apparently, I was mistaken.

-- 
Christoph M. Becker

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

#11679 — Re: server-side vs.client-side

On 10/31/2013 6:03 PM, Christoph Michael Becker wrote:
> Arno Welzel wrote:
>
>> Christoph Michael Becker, 2013-10-30 20:54:
>>
>>> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>>
>>>> One question - since both you and Thomas seem to be from Germany, and
>>>> have the same misunderstanding of the word "normally", what does
>>>> "normally" translate to in German?  What does it mean?
>>>
>>> In Germany it is "normalerweise"/"üblicherweise", what means as much
>>> usually.  Anyway, a misunderstanding of the term "normally" is not the
>>> problem here for me.  In my opinion, it is correct to state: "PHP is
>>> normally (usually, most often etc.) used on a server (for server-side
>>> programming)."
>>>
>>> It is as well correct to state: "No programming language is normally
>>> either server-side or client-side."  Otherwise it would mean, that there
>>> are programming languages that couldn't be used outside of a
>>> client-server context.
>>
>> Exactly *this* is the wrong assumption, what "normally" means in this
>> context. It does *NOT* mean that a language can *never* be used in other
>> ways - it only says that is the the most common use of it.
>
> I thought there is the same difference between
>
>    "No programming language is normally either server-side or
>     client-side."
>
> and
>
>    "No programming language is either normally server-side
>     or normally client-side."
>
> as it is in German.  Apparently, I was mistaken.
>

No, they do mean the same thing.  But your interpretation is incorrect.


-- 
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

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

#11706 — Re: server-side vs.client-side

Christoph Michael Becker wrote:

> Arno Welzel wrote:
>> Christoph Michael Becker, 2013-10-30 20:54:
>>> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>>> One question - since both you and Thomas seem to be from Germany, and
>>>> have the same misunderstanding of the word "normally", what does
>>>> "normally" translate to in German?  What does it mean?
>>>
>>> In Germany it is "normalerweise"/"üblicherweise", what means as much
>>> usually.  Anyway, a misunderstanding of the term "normally" is not the
>>> problem here for me.  In my opinion, it is correct to state: "PHP is
>>> normally (usually, most often etc.) used on a server (for server-side
>>> programming)."
>>>
>>> It is as well correct to state: "No programming language is normally
>>> either server-side or client-side."  Otherwise it would mean, that there
>>> are programming languages that couldn't be used outside of a
>>> client-server context.
>> 
>> Exactly *this* is the wrong assumption, what "normally" means in this
>> context. It does *NOT* mean that a language can *never* be used in other
>> ways - it only says that is the the most common use of it.
> 
> I thought there is the same difference between
> 
>   "No programming language is normally either server-side or
>    client-side."
> 
> and
> 
>   "No programming language is either normally server-side
>    or normally client-side."
> 
> as it is in German.  Apparently, I was mistaken.

You are not.  “normally” is (used here as) a “weasel word”, and the argument 
is fundamentally flawed.  What is “normally” – who defines what that is (not 
what it means)?  At which percentage does “normally” start?  You can see 
that this cannot lead to a sound argument.  Which is why I intentionally 
double-quoted the word.

JFTR: Mr. Welzel, too, is a native speaker of *German* only.  For more 
professional (and native-speakers-of-English's) interpretation and 
translation, for example go to

<http://dict.leo.org/ende/?lp=ende&lang=de&searchLoc=0&cmpType=relaxed&sectHdr=on&spellToler=&search=normally>
 
In particular, you might find this interesting:

<http://dict.leo.org/forum/viewGeneraldiscussion.php?idThread=1139295&idForum=4&lang=de&lp=ende>


PointedEars
-- 
    realism:    HTML 4.01 Strict
    evangelism: XHTML 1.0 Strict
    madness:    XHTML 1.1 as application/xhtml+xml
                                                    -- Bjoern Hoehrmann

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

#11708 — Re: server-side vs.client-side

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn, 2013-11-02 17:57:

> Christoph Michael Becker wrote:
> 
>> Arno Welzel wrote:
>>> Christoph Michael Becker, 2013-10-30 20:54:
>>>> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>>>> One question - since both you and Thomas seem to be from Germany, and
>>>>> have the same misunderstanding of the word "normally", what does
>>>>> "normally" translate to in German?  What does it mean?
>>>>
>>>> In Germany it is "normalerweise"/"üblicherweise", what means as much
>>>> usually.  Anyway, a misunderstanding of the term "normally" is not the
>>>> problem here for me.  In my opinion, it is correct to state: "PHP is
>>>> normally (usually, most often etc.) used on a server (for server-side
>>>> programming)."
>>>>
>>>> It is as well correct to state: "No programming language is normally
>>>> either server-side or client-side."  Otherwise it would mean, that there
>>>> are programming languages that couldn't be used outside of a
>>>> client-server context.
>>>
>>> Exactly *this* is the wrong assumption, what "normally" means in this
>>> context. It does *NOT* mean that a language can *never* be used in other
>>> ways - it only says that is the the most common use of it.
>>
>> I thought there is the same difference between
>>
>>   "No programming language is normally either server-side or
>>    client-side."
>>
>> and
>>
>>   "No programming language is either normally server-side
>>    or normally client-side."
>>
>> as it is in German.  Apparently, I was mistaken.
> 
> You are not.  “normally” is (used here as) a “weasel word”, and the argument 
> is fundamentally flawed.  What is “normally” – who defines what that is (not 
> what it means)?  At which percentage does “normally” start?  You can see 
> that this cannot lead to a sound argument.  Which is why I intentionally 
> double-quoted the word.
> 
> JFTR: Mr. Welzel, too, is a native speaker of *German* only.  For more 

JFTR: As you are ;-)

I think your problem is, that you (mis-)understand "normally" in this
context as "no other use makes sense" or "no other use is possible" -
which of course is not true.

We all know that PHP can be used in different ways and not just "server
side". But when saying "PHP is normally used server side" this does not
say anything at all about where PHP *can* be used, just what it is
*meant* to be used for and what its strengths are. Just think a moment
about the history of PHP - it all started as a set of tools to create
HTML documents on the server:

<http://www.php.net/manual/en/history.php.php>

"[...] the very first incarnation of PHP was a simple set of Common
Gateway Interface (CGI) binaries written in the C programming language."

> professional (and native-speakers-of-English's) interpretation and 
> translation, for example go to
> 
> <http://dict.leo.org/ende/?lp=ende&lang=de&searchLoc=0&cmpType=relaxed&sectHdr=on&spellToler=&search=normally>

You call this a "professional interpretation and translation"?

Anyway - I would also suggest
<http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/normally?q=normally>.

> In particular, you might find this interesting:
> 
> <http://dict.leo.org/forum/viewGeneraldiscussion.php?idThread=1139295&idForum=4&lang=de&lp=ende>

Some thoughts by other people - yes, interesting - but a "professional
interpretation"?


-- 
Arno Welzel
http://arnowelzel.de
http://de-rec-fahrrad.de

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

#11709 — Re: server-side vs.client-side

On 02/11/13 18:36, Arno Welzel wrote:
> I think your problem is, that you (mis-)understand "normally" in this
> context as "no other use makes sense" or "no other use is possible" -
> which of course is not true.

Yes, being instructed in colloquial English by  German is...either 
unusual, or typical, depending on your prejudices..

Normal means most commonly that's all. i.e. where you might expect. 
There is no implication of the exclusion of other possibilities.



Its normal to see squirrels in trees, or on the ground, less so to see 
them in freezers or pies..


-- 
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) – a system of government where the least capable to 
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the 
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are 
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a 
diminishing number of producers.

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

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

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

csiph-web