Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #286560 > unrolled thread
| Started by | owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-03-29 13:24 +0000 |
| Last post | 2015-03-29 15:50 -0600 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 413 — 25 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 13:24 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-03-29 15:41 +0200
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 13:59 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-03-29 16:00 +0200
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 14:09 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-03-29 16:10 +0200
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 14:19 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-03-29 16:16 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-29 10:20 -0400
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 14:35 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-29 11:09 -0400
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 14:59 +0000
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-29 16:04 -0600
Re: fucking firefox "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-03-29 10:18 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-03-29 16:23 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-03-29 12:38 -0400
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 17:02 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-03-29 13:08 -0400
Re: fucking firefox John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2015-03-29 10:12 -0700
Re: fucking firefox "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-03-29 13:53 -0400
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-30 03:48 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-29 10:04 -0400
Re: fucking firefox "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-03-29 10:15 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-29 10:20 -0400
Re: fucking firefox "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-03-29 10:30 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-29 11:07 -0400
Re: fucking firefox DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-29 21:04 -0400
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-30 01:21 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-30 13:01 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-30 12:54 -0400
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 14:39 +0000
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 14:37 +0000
Re: fucking firefox John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2015-03-29 07:30 -0700
Re: fucking firefox Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2015-03-30 11:21 +0100
Re: fucking firefox ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-03-29 14:39 +0000
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 15:06 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-03-29 17:09 +0200
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 15:17 +0000
Re: fucking firefox ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-03-30 04:16 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-30 13:31 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-03-30 19:47 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-30 14:01 -0400
Re: fucking firefox chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-30 13:35 -0500
Re: fucking firefox chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-30 13:57 -0500
Re: fucking firefox Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-03-30 20:00 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-30 20:56 -0400
Re: fucking firefox William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-03-30 22:22 +0100
Re: fucking firefox Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-03-30 19:59 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-03-30 20:02 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-03-31 08:53 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-03-31 05:53 -0400
Re: fucking firefox William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-03-31 10:59 +0100
The Apache Software Foundation Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-03-31 06:11 -0400
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-31 13:07 -0600
Re: fucking firefox ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-03-31 22:32 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-31 21:28 -0400
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-01 12:17 -0600
Re: fucking firefox DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-31 08:40 -0400
Re: fucking firefox vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-04-01 08:12 -0700
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-04-01 17:24 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-04-01 12:10 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-04-01 18:37 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-01 10:15 -0700
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-04-01 19:51 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-01 11:20 -0700
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-04-01 14:22 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-01 11:27 -0700
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-01 16:49 -0600
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-04-02 01:01 +0200
Re: fucking wintrolls ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-04-01 23:01 +0000
Re: fucking lintrolls GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-02 16:46 -0600
Re: fucking firefox Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-04-01 19:51 -0400
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-02 16:45 -0600
Re: fucking firefox cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-04-02 05:00 -0700
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-02 16:44 -0600
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-02 19:06 -0600
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-04-03 13:12 +0200
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-03 12:39 -0600
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-01 12:17 -0600
Re: fucking firefox cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-04-01 11:27 -0700
Re: fucking firefox Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-01 11:30 -0700
Re: fucking firefox cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-04-01 11:35 -0700
Re: fucking firefox "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-04-01 14:47 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-01 12:01 -0700
Re: fucking firefox cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2015-04-01 12:14 -0700
Re: fucking firefox Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-01 13:02 -0700
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-04-01 22:57 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-04-01 23:46 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-04-02 00:02 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-04-02 00:08 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-04-02 00:23 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-01 15:43 -0700
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-02 16:41 -0600
Re: fucking firefox Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-04 09:36 -0700
Re: fucking firefox "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-04-01 20:11 -0400
Re: fucking firefox "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-04-01 20:30 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-01 18:30 -0700
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-02 16:39 -0600
Re: fucking firefox DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-04-01 21:02 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-04-01 23:47 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-04-02 06:09 +0200
Re: fucking firefox DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-04-02 08:58 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-04-02 09:23 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-02 08:12 -0700
Re: fucking firefox Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2015-04-04 02:17 +0000
Re: fucking firefox DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-04-03 09:38 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-04-01 19:57 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-04-01 19:56 -0400
Re: fucking firefox JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-04-02 13:35 -0500
Re: fucking wintrolls ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-04-01 22:17 +0000
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-01 16:46 -0600
Re: fucking firefox Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-01 14:58 -0700
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-04-02 00:13 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-01 15:20 -0700
Re: fucking firefox Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-04-01 21:31 +0200
Re: fucking firefox "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-04-01 15:38 -0400
Ezekiel doesn't care, obviously. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2015-04-02 08:20 -0700
Re: Ezekiel doesn't care, obviously. "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-04-02 12:01 -0400
Your Usenet skills reflect your email skills. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2015-04-02 09:55 -0700
Re: Your Usenet skills reflect your email skills. Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-04-02 13:37 -0400
Re: Your Usenet skills reflect your email skills. "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-04-02 14:20 -0400
Re: Your Usenet skills reflect your email skills. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-04-02 11:34 -0700
If you don't need more, than fine. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2015-04-02 19:25 -0700
Re: If you don't need more, than fine. Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-04-02 23:50 -0400
Re: If you don't need more, than fine. Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-04-03 13:10 +0200
Re: If you don't need more, than fine. Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-04-03 12:58 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-04-01 19:53 -0400
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-01 12:17 -0600
Re: fucking firefox Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-04-01 19:49 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-04-02 01:53 +0200
Re: fucking firefox DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-04-01 12:36 -0400
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-01 12:16 -0600
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-31 08:59 -0400
Re: fucking firefox DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-31 09:25 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-31 09:54 -0400
Re: fucking firefox ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-03-31 00:04 +0000
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-30 15:29 -0600
Re: fucking firefox DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-30 20:49 -0400
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-30 21:56 -0600
Re: fucking firefox Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2015-03-31 10:50 +0100
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-03-31 12:11 +0200
Re: fucking firefox chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-31 07:07 -0500
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-03-31 14:42 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2015-03-31 13:45 +0100
Re: fucking firefox DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-31 08:55 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-03-31 17:13 +0200
Re: fucking firefox "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-03-31 11:35 -0400
Re: fucking firefox vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-04-01 08:09 -0700
Re: fucking firefox "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-04-01 11:59 -0400
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-01 12:15 -0600
Re: fucking firefox "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-04-01 15:26 -0400
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-01 16:42 -0600
Re: fucking firefox vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-04-01 15:01 -0700
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-01 16:43 -0600
Re: fucking firefox "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-04-01 19:54 -0400
If wealth and/or IQ made you happy... Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2015-04-02 06:16 -0700
Re: If wealth and/or IQ made you happy... Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-04-02 13:47 -0500
Re: If wealth and/or IQ made you happy... jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2015-04-02 20:14 +0000
Re: If wealth and/or IQ made you happy... benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-04-02 17:57 -0400
Re: If wealth and/or IQ made you happy... "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-04-02 18:21 -0400
Re: If wealth and/or IQ made you happy... vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-04-02 16:48 -0700
Re: If wealth and/or IQ made you happy... "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-04-02 22:14 -0400
Define "Good things". Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2015-04-02 19:29 -0700
Re: Define "Good things". Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-04-02 22:15 -0500
Re: Define "Good things". Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-04-02 23:49 -0400
The House of Saud. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2015-04-02 07:55 -0700
Re: fucking firefox Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-04-01 12:07 -0400
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-01 18:40 +0000
Re: fucking firefox vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-04-01 14:52 -0700
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-01 16:40 -0600
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-31 11:56 -0600
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-03-31 20:31 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-03-31 12:03 -0700
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-31 16:43 -0600
Re: fucking firefox vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-04-01 07:38 -0700
Re: fucking firefox ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-04-01 14:42 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-04-01 17:13 +0200
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-01 12:14 -0600
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-01 12:13 -0600
Re: fucking firefox vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-04-01 13:49 -0700
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-01 16:39 -0600
Re: fucking firefox ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-03-30 04:15 +0000
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-30 04:33 +0000
Re: fucking firefox ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-03-30 04:35 +0000
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-30 04:50 +0000
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-30 15:28 -0600
Re: fucking firefox Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-03-30 06:00 -0400
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-30 15:28 -0600
Re: fucking firefox Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2015-03-30 23:26 +0000
Re: fucking firefox "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-03-30 08:05 -0400
Hooting owl Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-03-30 05:56 -0400
Re: Hooting owl William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-03-30 11:01 +0100
Re: Hooting owl Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 08:58 -0700
Re: Hooting owl Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-03-30 09:43 -0700
Re: Hooting owl GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-30 15:26 -0600
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-30 13:28 -0400
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-30 15:25 -0600
fucking owl Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-03-29 12:27 -0400
Re: fucking owl Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-03-29 12:32 -0400
Re: fucking owl GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-29 16:00 -0600
Fucking bowel Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> - 2015-03-29 18:41 +0000
Re: fucking owl owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 18:54 +0000
Re: fucking owl GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-29 15:58 -0600
Re: fucking firefox "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-03-29 09:45 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-03-29 15:54 +0200
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 14:06 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-29 10:00 -0400
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-29 15:55 -0600
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-29 09:55 -0400
Re: fucking firefox ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-03-29 14:38 +0000
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 14:43 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-29 16:42 -0400
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-29 15:55 -0600
Re: fucking firefox taka0038@gmail.com - 2015-04-01 09:23 -0700
Re: fucking firefox ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-03-29 14:41 +0000
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 14:55 +0000
Re: fucking firefox ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-03-30 04:25 +0000
Re: fucking firefox ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-03-30 04:29 +0000
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-30 15:24 -0600
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-30 04:44 +0000
Re: fucking firefox William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-03-30 09:05 +0100
Re: fucking firefox DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-30 09:55 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-03-30 09:40 -0700
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-30 15:23 -0600
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-30 15:22 -0600
Re: fucking firefox William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-03-29 16:19 +0100
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 15:41 +0000
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-29 15:54 -0600
Re: fucking firefox ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-03-30 04:09 +0000
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-30 04:23 +0000
Re: fucking firefox ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-03-30 04:32 +0000
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-30 04:40 +0000
Re: fucking firefox William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-03-30 09:06 +0100
Re: fucking firefox DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-30 10:06 -0400
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-30 15:21 -0600
Re: fucking firefox DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-30 20:45 -0400
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-30 15:20 -0600
Re: fucking firefox William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-03-30 09:02 +0100
Irritable bowel chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-30 07:09 -0500
Re: Irritable bowel DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-30 10:40 -0400
Re: fucking firefox DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-30 10:40 -0400
Re: fucking firefox "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-03-30 11:25 -0400
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-30 15:18 -0600
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-30 15:16 -0600
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-29 15:53 -0600
Re: fucking firefox ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-03-30 03:47 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-03-30 08:23 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Desk Rabbit <me@example.com> - 2015-03-30 16:06 +0100
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-30 15:15 -0600
Re: fucking firefox Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-29 09:43 -0700
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 16:57 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-29 12:13 -0700
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 19:24 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-29 12:35 -0700
Re: fucking firefox Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-03-29 12:44 -0700
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 19:54 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-29 13:06 -0700
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-29 20:29 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-29 13:59 -0700
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-30 00:55 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-29 18:15 -0700
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-30 01:38 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-29 18:54 -0700
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-30 02:25 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-29 22:53 -0700
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-30 03:12 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-29 22:56 -0700
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-30 13:06 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-03-30 19:46 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-30 14:00 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-03-30 20:15 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 11:42 -0700
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-03-30 20:54 +0200
Re: fucking firefox JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-03-30 14:03 -0500
Re: fucking firefox Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 12:12 -0700
Re: fucking firefox chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-30 14:22 -0500
Re: fucking firefox vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-03-30 15:37 -0700
Re: fucking firefox Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-03-30 19:50 -0400
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-30 21:51 -0600
Re: fucking firefox Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-03-30 19:49 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-03-30 20:01 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-03-31 08:50 +0200
"What's a Sea drive?" Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-03-31 05:57 -0400
Re: "What's a Sea drive?" DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-31 08:40 -0400
Re: "What's a Sea drive?" chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-31 09:14 -0500
Re: "What's a Sea drive?" DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-31 13:22 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-31 08:57 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-03-31 17:11 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-31 11:40 -0400
Re: fucking firefox DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-31 11:47 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-31 13:29 -0400
Re: fucking firefox ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-03-31 22:29 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-03-31 18:39 -0400
Re: fucking firefox JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-04-02 13:31 -0500
Re: fucking firefox chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-02 14:19 -0500
Re: fucking firefox JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-04-02 15:42 -0500
Re: fucking firefox ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-04-02 21:19 +0000
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-02 23:41 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-04-02 19:37 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-02 12:49 -0700
Re: fucking firefox William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-04-02 22:56 +0100
C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-04-02 19:40 -0400
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-04-03 09:40 +0100
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-04-03 06:04 -0400
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-04-03 13:07 +0200
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-04-03 12:16 +0100
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-03 07:11 -0500
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-03 12:35 -0600
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-03 12:35 -0600
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-04-03 07:57 -0400
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-04-03 15:21 +0200
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-04-03 09:42 -0400
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-04-03 16:03 +0200
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-04-03 10:16 -0400
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-04-03 10:16 -0400
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-03 12:35 -0600
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-04-03 10:20 -0400
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-03 12:34 -0600
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-04-03 22:29 +0100
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-04-04 09:33 -0400
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-04-03 09:49 -0400
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-03 09:10 -0500
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-03 12:31 -0600
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-04-03 11:00 -0500
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-04-03 12:24 -0400
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-04-03 12:36 -0400
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-03 12:30 -0600
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-03 12:30 -0600
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-03 12:29 -0600
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-04-03 15:01 -0400
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-04 16:25 -0600
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-03 12:28 -0600
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-04-03 22:29 +0100
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-03 12:28 -0600
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-04-03 13:01 -0400
Re: C:, D:, relics of DOS, in Windows flagship offering GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-03 12:27 -0600
Re: fucking firefox vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-04-02 16:55 -0700
Re: fucking firefox vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-04-02 17:21 -0700
Re: fucking firefox "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-04-02 22:06 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-04-03 13:02 +0200
Re: fucking firefox "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-04-03 07:53 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-04-03 15:19 +0200
Re: fucking firefox "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-04-03 09:36 -0400
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-03 12:27 -0600
Re: fucking firefox Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-04-03 09:51 -0400
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-03 12:26 -0600
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-03 12:25 -0600
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-02 19:03 -0600
Re: fucking firefox Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-04-02 19:35 -0400
Re: fucking firefox chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-03 06:49 -0500
Re: fucking firefox Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-04-03 09:00 -0400
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-03 12:22 -0600
Re: fucking firefox "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-04-03 14:55 -0400
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-04 16:24 -0600
Re: fucking firefox Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-04-03 09:39 -0400
Re: fucking firefox JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-04-03 11:03 -0500
Re: fucking firefox Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-31 17:40 -0700
Re: fucking firefox DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-04-01 08:45 -0400
Re: fucking firefox JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-03-31 09:33 -0500
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-31 11:11 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-03-31 17:19 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-31 11:42 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-03-31 13:18 -0400
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-31 11:43 -0600
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-03-31 20:30 +0200
Re: fucking firefox William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-03-31 22:36 +0100
Re: fucking firefox Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-03-31 23:51 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-04-01 00:18 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-03-31 19:52 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-31 21:27 -0400
Re: fucking firefox vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-04-01 08:23 -0700
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-01 12:10 -0600
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-04-01 14:30 -0400
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-01 16:30 -0600
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-31 16:41 -0600
Re: fucking firefox ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-03-31 22:49 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-03-31 19:54 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-31 21:35 -0400
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-31 16:40 -0600
Re: fucking firefox William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-03-31 22:33 +0100
Re: fucking firefox ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> - 2015-03-31 22:39 +0000
Re: fucking firefox DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-03-31 12:04 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-31 13:34 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-31 10:50 -0700
Re: fucking firefox chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-31 08:33 -0500
Re: fucking firefox Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 12:15 -0700
Re: fucking firefox vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-03-30 15:31 -0700
Re: fucking firefox Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 16:23 -0700
Re: fucking firefox owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-03-30 23:36 +0000
Re: fucking firefox Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 17:44 -0700
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-30 15:26 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-03-30 22:06 +0200
Re: fucking firefox JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-03-30 15:19 -0500
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-30 23:02 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-03-31 08:49 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-31 08:52 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 11:39 -0700
Re: fucking firefox Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 12:16 -0700
Re: fucking firefox Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-03-30 19:46 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-03-31 08:47 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-31 08:50 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-03-31 17:07 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-31 11:37 -0400
Re: fucking firefox vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-04-01 09:03 -0700
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-04-01 12:56 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-04-01 19:50 +0200
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-04-01 14:21 -0400
Re: fucking firefox William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-04-01 22:45 +0100
Re: fucking firefox DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-04-01 21:01 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-04-01 20:00 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-03-30 12:54 -0400
Re: fucking firefox Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-03-30 10:08 -0700
Re: fucking firefox GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-03-29 15:50 -0600
Page 6 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 21 Next page →
| From | Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-02 06:09 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <20150402060948.4f88ad0a@maxa-pc> |
| In reply to | #287369 |
On Wed, 01 Apr 2015 23:47:00 -0400 Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> wrote: > On 2015-04-01 9:02 PM, DFS wrote: > > On 4/1/2015 6:23 PM, Peter Köhlmann wrote: > >> Melzzzzz wrote: > > > >>> JavaScript is not necessarily run inside browser - eg: > >>> https://code.google.com/p/v8/ > >> > >> Thats fine. So they have added the necessary stuff to replace the > >> browser. > >> Kind of lets JavaScript climb the "programming language" barrier > >> reef, even > >> if barely so. It simply has no features you could consider > >> worthwile outside of the browser realm. It is rather clumsy then > >> > >> I still will not consider it as a programming language > > > > > > What you consider a programming language is irrelevant. > > I don't consider whatever retarded place Melzzzzzz comes from to be a > real country. > You are liar and hypocrite as well...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-02 08:58 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mfjeco$i8p$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #287369 |
On 4/1/2015 11:47 PM, Slimer wrote: > On 2015-04-01 9:02 PM, DFS wrote: >> On 4/1/2015 6:23 PM, Peter Köhlmann wrote: >>> Melzzzzz wrote: >> >>>> JavaScript is not necessarily run inside browser - eg: >>>> https://code.google.com/p/v8/ >>> >>> Thats fine. So they have added the necessary stuff to replace the >>> browser. >>> Kind of lets JavaScript climb the "programming language" barrier reef, >>> even >>> if barely so. It simply has no features you could consider worthwile >>> outside of the browser realm. It is rather clumsy then >>> >>> I still will not consider it as a programming language >> >> >> What you consider a programming language is irrelevant. > > I don't consider whatever retarded place Melzzzzzz comes from to be a > real country. Serbia I think. I had a Serbian housemate years ago. Smart guy, very successful, but what a chintzy prick. He would literally cheat you out of $0.25 if he could. He legally changed his name from a really ethnic Serbian name to one of those square-jawed American names, like Jonathan David Steel. Hilarious.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-02 09:23 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mfjfq6$nle$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #287391 |
On 2015-04-02 8:58 AM, DFS wrote: > On 4/1/2015 11:47 PM, Slimer wrote: >> On 2015-04-01 9:02 PM, DFS wrote: >>> On 4/1/2015 6:23 PM, Peter Köhlmann wrote: >>>> Melzzzzz wrote: >>> >>>>> JavaScript is not necessarily run inside browser - eg: >>>>> https://code.google.com/p/v8/ >>>> >>>> Thats fine. So they have added the necessary stuff to replace the >>>> browser. >>>> Kind of lets JavaScript climb the "programming language" barrier reef, >>>> even >>>> if barely so. It simply has no features you could consider worthwile >>>> outside of the browser realm. It is rather clumsy then >>>> >>>> I still will not consider it as a programming language >>> >>> >>> What you consider a programming language is irrelevant. >> >> I don't consider whatever retarded place Melzzzzzz comes from to be a >> real country. > > > Serbia I think. > > I had a Serbian housemate years ago. Smart guy, very successful, but > what a chintzy prick. He would literally cheat you out of $0.25 if he > could. > > He legally changed his name from a really ethnic Serbian name to one of > those square-jawed American names, like Jonathan David Steel. Hilarious. If he's Serbian, I feel sorry for his compatriots. I used to go out with a Serbian girl and we clicked extremely well. Her dad and I, in particular, got along marvelously and I couldn't help but really respect the culture. Knowing how they were and how Melzzzzzzzz is, it's clear to me that the whole country would love it if he emigrated. -- Slimer OpenMedia, GreenPeace Supporter & SPCA Paw Partner Encrypt.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-02 08:12 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <65f69590-0d7c-4a88-833c-3518d86defc5@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #287401 |
On Thursday, April 2, 2015 at 7:23:10 AM UTC-6, Slimer wrote: > On 2015-04-02 8:58 AM, DFS wrote: > > On 4/1/2015 11:47 PM, Slimer wrote: > >> On 2015-04-01 9:02 PM, DFS wrote: > >>> On 4/1/2015 6:23 PM, Peter Köhlmann wrote: > >>>> Melzzzzz wrote: > >>> > >>>>> JavaScript is not necessarily run inside browser - eg: > >>>>> https://code.google.com/p/v8/ > >>>> > >>>> Thats fine. So they have added the necessary stuff to replace the > >>>> browser. > >>>> Kind of lets JavaScript climb the "programming language" barrier reef, > >>>> even > >>>> if barely so. It simply has no features you could consider worthwile > >>>> outside of the browser realm. It is rather clumsy then > >>>> > >>>> I still will not consider it as a programming language > >>> > >>> > >>> What you consider a programming language is irrelevant. > >> > >> I don't consider whatever retarded place Melzzzzzz comes from to be a > >> real country. > > > > > > Serbia I think. > > > > I had a Serbian housemate years ago. Smart guy, very successful, but > > what a chintzy prick. He would literally cheat you out of $0.25 if he > > could. > > > > He legally changed his name from a really ethnic Serbian name to one of > > those square-jawed American names, like Jonathan David Steel. Hilarious. > > If he's Serbian, I feel sorry for his compatriots. I used to go out with > a Serbian girl and we clicked extremely well. Her dad and I, in > particular, got along marvelously and I couldn't help but really respect > the culture. Knowing how they were and how Melzzzzzzzz is, it's clear to > me that the whole country would love it if he emigrated. Seems like you realize you're not representative of Canadians, I'm sure they like the idea, too ;)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tattoo Vampire <sitting@this.computer> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-04 02:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mfnhk5$mvn$1@tattoovampire.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #287427 |
Steve Carroll wrote: > Seems like you realize you're not representative of Canadians, I'm sure > they like the idea, too He's not in Canada, he's in Prescott, AZ. :-D
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | DFS <nospam@dfs.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-03 09:38 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mfm53v$voi$10@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #287401 |
On 4/2/2015 9:23 AM, Slimer wrote: > On 2015-04-02 8:58 AM, DFS wrote: >> On 4/1/2015 11:47 PM, Slimer wrote: >>> On 2015-04-01 9:02 PM, DFS wrote: >>>> On 4/1/2015 6:23 PM, Peter Köhlmann wrote: >>>>> Melzzzzz wrote: >>>> >>>>>> JavaScript is not necessarily run inside browser - eg: >>>>>> https://code.google.com/p/v8/ >>>>> >>>>> Thats fine. So they have added the necessary stuff to replace the >>>>> browser. >>>>> Kind of lets JavaScript climb the "programming language" barrier reef, >>>>> even >>>>> if barely so. It simply has no features you could consider worthwile >>>>> outside of the browser realm. It is rather clumsy then >>>>> >>>>> I still will not consider it as a programming language >>>> >>>> >>>> What you consider a programming language is irrelevant. >>> >>> I don't consider whatever retarded place Melzzzzzz comes from to be a >>> real country. >> >> >> Serbia I think. >> >> I had a Serbian housemate years ago. Smart guy, very successful, but >> what a chintzy prick. He would literally cheat you out of $0.25 if he >> could. >> >> He legally changed his name from a really ethnic Serbian name to one of >> those square-jawed American names, like Jonathan David Steel. Hilarious. > > If he's Serbian, I feel sorry for his compatriots. I used to go out with > a Serbian girl and we clicked extremely well. Her dad and I, in > particular, got along marvelously and I couldn't help but really respect > the culture. Knowing how they were and how Melzzzzzzzz is, it's clear to > me that the whole country would love it if he emigrated. ha! You hear that, Melzzzzz? All 7 million Serbs want you /gone/!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-01 19:57 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mfi0jp$8k6$7@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #287292 |
Melzzzzz wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > JavaScript is not necessarily run inside browser - eg: > https://code.google.com/p/v8/ Interesting! Thanks for the link. -- grep me no patterns and I'll tell you no lines.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-01 19:56 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mfi0gr$8k6$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #287291 |
Peter Köhlmann wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > Melzzzzz wrote: > >> On Wed, 01 Apr 2015 22:57 +0200 >> Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote: >> >>> Steve Carroll wrote: >>> >>> > On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 1:14:35 PM UTC-6, cc wrote: >>> >> On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 3:01:09 PM UTC-4, Steve Carroll >>> >> wrote: >>> >> > On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 12:46:53 PM UTC-6, Ezekiel wrote: >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > I notice C programmers often say this and, while it's >>> >> > technically true, it bothers me to just leave it there without >>> >> > pointing to a thread like this: >>> >> > >>> >> > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9154388/does-untyped-also-mean-dynamically-typed-in-the-academic-cs-world >>> >> > >>> >> >>> >> Right, which does have some academics using it "incorrectly" too. >>> >> I almost put both but I figured more people would know what I meant >>> >> if I said untyped than dynamically typed. Hey, at least I didn't >>> >> say weakly typed. But yeah, dynamically typed is correct, my fault. >>> > >>> > There's one thing I think gets overlooked when considering >>> > Javascript, the browser is almost like a mini OS now and this is >>> > its native language. We could argue about terms like "scripting" >>> > language or "programming" language but, in my opinion, it'd be >>> > pretty silly to look at, say, a Javascript gaming engine and >>> > exclaim: 'That's not *real* programming!'. >>> > >>> > But hey, I'm just a novice at this stuff so take that into >>> > consideration, I know PK will ;) >>> >>> You have to make some really farfetching allowances to declare >>> JavaScript a "real" programming language. >>> You have to define a browser is "the OS" in order to get anywhere >>> near that. >>> >>> I myself am rather strict in my opinios about that. If a program >>> language can't be used to build programs which run on the bare OS, it >>> isn't a "prgramming language". Naturally nearly always there will be >>> some runtime- libraries, but I never would go that far to declare a >>> browser a "runtime library". So Java (as defined originally) just >>> barely makes it. Now normally Java is compiled, even if at runtime. >>> JavaScript is just that, a scripting language >> >> I don't agree. JavaScript is a programming language, no matter how >> it is run. Scripting language is still computer programming language. > > Feel free to disagree. *My* definition of "programming language" simply does > not include that you have to run the code inside of a browser. It should at > least run (if need be with the help of runtime libraries) on the bare metal. > For my tastes a browser is not "bare metal", no matter how much you stretch > the definition Javascript is a significant language, not just in how much it is used, but in its features. Whether it runs in a browser or a virtual machine or an interpreter or bare metal doesn't change that, in my opinion. If you gotta debug it, it is a programming language :-D. -- Eternity is a terrible thought. I mean, where's it going to end? -- Tom Stoppard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-02 13:35 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <slrnmhr2vn.eaj.jedi@nomad.mishnet> |
| In reply to | #287291 |
On 2015-04-01, Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
> Melzzzzz wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 01 Apr 2015 22:57 +0200
>> Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>>
>>> Steve Carroll wrote:
>>>
>>> > On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 1:14:35 PM UTC-6, cc wrote:
>>> >> On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 3:01:09 PM UTC-4, Steve Carroll
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >> > On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 12:46:53 PM UTC-6, Ezekiel wrote:
[deletia]
>> I don't agree. JavaScript is a programming language, no matter how
>> it is run. Scripting language is still computer programming language.
>
> Feel free to disagree. *My* definition of "programming language" simply does
> not include that you have to run the code inside of a browser. It should at
> least run (if need be with the help of runtime libraries) on the bare metal.
> For my tastes a browser is not "bare metal", no matter how much you stretch
> the definition
It's an academic difference.
I have seen interpreters for "compiled languages".
I have seem compilers for "interpreted languages".
The only really relevant question is whether or not it's
Turing Complete. The rest is just minutia and window dressing.
--
If you are going to judge Linux based on how easy
it is to get onto a Macintosh. Let's try installing |||
MacOS X on a DELL! / | \
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | ronb <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-01 22:17 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: fucking wintrolls |
| Message-ID | <mfhqp0$ont$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #287285 |
On Wed, 01 Apr 2015 23:46:22 +0200, Melzzzzz wrote: > I don't agree. JavaScript is a programming language, no matter how it is > run. Scripting language is still computer programming language. I'm not arguing one way or the other ... I'm just taking this opportunity to change the Subject Line. -- To WinDrones and iCultists obsessed with Linux. Get a life.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-01 16:46 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <weCdnfJK0YvK6IHInZ2dnUU7-U-dnZ2d@bresnan.com> |
| In reply to | #287285 |
Melzzzzz wrote: > On Wed, 01 Apr 2015 22:57 +0200 > Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote: > >> Steve Carroll wrote: >> >> > On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 1:14:35 PM UTC-6, cc wrote: >> >> On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 3:01:09 PM UTC-4, Steve Carroll >> >> wrote: >> >> > On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 12:46:53 PM UTC-6, Ezekiel wrote: >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > I notice C programmers often say this and, while it's >> >> > technically true, it bothers me to just leave it there without >> >> > pointing to a thread like this: >> >> > >> >> > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9154388/does-untyped-also-mean- dynamically-typed-in-the-academic-cs-world >> >> > >> >> >> >> Right, which does have some academics using it "incorrectly" too. >> >> I almost put both but I figured more people would know what I meant >> >> if I said untyped than dynamically typed. Hey, at least I didn't >> >> say weakly typed. But yeah, dynamically typed is correct, my fault. >> > >> > There's one thing I think gets overlooked when considering >> > Javascript, the browser is almost like a mini OS now and this is >> > its native language. We could argue about terms like "scripting" >> > language or "programming" language but, in my opinion, it'd be >> > pretty silly to look at, say, a Javascript gaming engine and >> > exclaim: 'That's not *real* programming!'. >> > >> > But hey, I'm just a novice at this stuff so take that into >> > consideration, I know PK will ;) >> >> You have to make some really farfetching allowances to declare >> JavaScript a "real" programming language. >> You have to define a browser is "the OS" in order to get anywhere >> near that. >> >> I myself am rather strict in my opinios about that. If a program >> language can't be used to build programs which run on the bare OS, it >> isn't a "prgramming language". Naturally nearly always there will be >> some runtime- libraries, but I never would go that far to declare a >> browser a "runtime library". So Java (as defined originally) just >> barely makes it. Now normally Java is compiled, even if at runtime. >> JavaScript is just that, a scripting language > > I don't agree. JavaScript is a programming language, no matter how > it is run. Scripting language is still computer programming language. I suppose I'll agree with you here. Let's not forget the Java Runtime Environment (JRE).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-01 14:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c3b791a1-5ddc-47da-8414-899f70a5b9c6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #287274 |
On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 2:57:03 PM UTC-6, Peter Köhlmann wrote: > Steve Carroll wrote: > > > On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 1:14:35 PM UTC-6, cc wrote: > >> On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 3:01:09 PM UTC-4, Steve Carroll wrote: > >> > On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 12:46:53 PM UTC-6, Ezekiel wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > I notice C programmers often say this and, while it's > >> > technically true, it bothers me to just leave it there without > >> > pointing to a thread like this: > >> > > >> > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9154388/does-untyped-also-mean-dynamically-typed-in-the-academic-cs-world > >> > > >> > >> Right, which does have some academics using it "incorrectly" too. > >> I almost put both but I figured more people would know what I meant > >> if I said untyped than dynamically typed. Hey, at least I didn't say > >> weakly typed. But yeah, dynamically typed is correct, my fault. > > > > There's one thing I think gets overlooked when considering Javascript, the > > browser is almost like a mini OS now and this is its native language. We > > could argue about terms like "scripting" language or "programming" > > language but, in my opinion, it'd be pretty silly to look at, say, a > > Javascript gaming engine and exclaim: 'That's not *real* programming!'. > > > > But hey, I'm just a novice at this stuff so take that into consideration, > > I know PK will ;) > > You have to make some really farfetching allowances to declare JavaScript a > "real" programming language. > You have to define a browser is "the OS" in order to get anywhere near that. > > I myself am rather strict in my opinios about that. If a program language > can't be used to build programs which run on the bare OS, it isn't a > "prgramming language". Naturally nearly always there will be some runtime- > libraries, but I never would go that far to declare a browser a "runtime > library". So Java (as defined originally) just barely makes it. Now normally > Java is compiled, even if at runtime. JavaScript is just that, a scripting > language No question, but the lines are staring to blur more than they ever have. For example: http://tylergaw.com/articles/building-osx-apps-with-js
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-02 00:13 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mfhqg1$occ$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #287289 |
Steve Carroll wrote: > On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 2:57:03 PM UTC-6, Peter Köhlmann wrote: >> Steve Carroll wrote: >> >> > On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 1:14:35 PM UTC-6, cc wrote: >> >> On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 3:01:09 PM UTC-4, Steve Carroll wrote: >> >> > On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 12:46:53 PM UTC-6, Ezekiel wrote: >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > I notice C programmers often say this and, while it's >> >> > technically true, it bothers me to just leave it there without >> >> > pointing to a thread like this: >> >> > >> >> > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9154388/does-untyped-also-mean-dynamically-typed-in-the-academic-cs-world >> >> > >> >> >> >> Right, which does have some academics using it "incorrectly" too. >> >> I almost put both but I figured more people would know what I meant >> >> if I said untyped than dynamically typed. Hey, at least I didn't say >> >> weakly typed. But yeah, dynamically typed is correct, my fault. >> > >> > There's one thing I think gets overlooked when considering Javascript, >> > the browser is almost like a mini OS now and this is its native >> > language. We could argue about terms like "scripting" language or >> > "programming" language but, in my opinion, it'd be pretty silly to look >> > at, say, a Javascript gaming engine and exclaim: 'That's not *real* >> > programming!'. >> > >> > But hey, I'm just a novice at this stuff so take that into >> > consideration, I know PK will ;) >> >> You have to make some really farfetching allowances to declare JavaScript >> a "real" programming language. >> You have to define a browser is "the OS" in order to get anywhere near >> that. >> >> I myself am rather strict in my opinios about that. If a program language >> can't be used to build programs which run on the bare OS, it isn't a >> "prgramming language". Naturally nearly always there will be some >> runtime- libraries, but I never would go that far to declare a browser a >> "runtime library". So Java (as defined originally) just barely makes it. >> Now normally Java is compiled, even if at runtime. JavaScript is just >> that, a scripting language > > No question, but the lines are staring to blur more than they ever have. > For example: > > http://tylergaw.com/articles/building-osx-apps-with-js Thats obviously good news for anyone using applescript, as that "language" is by far the most hideous thing known to mankind. But that thingy will not make it to anywhere outside of apple territory, and even there it will remain a pile of crap
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-01 15:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3351378b-fabb-45da-b739-1c202b29a6a6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #287294 |
On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 4:13:12 PM UTC-6, Peter Köhlmann wrote: > Steve Carroll wrote: > > > On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 2:57:03 PM UTC-6, Peter Köhlmann wrote: > >> Steve Carroll wrote: > >> > >> > On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 1:14:35 PM UTC-6, cc wrote: > >> >> On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 3:01:09 PM UTC-4, Steve Carroll wrote: > >> >> > On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 12:46:53 PM UTC-6, Ezekiel wrote: > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > I notice C programmers often say this and, while it's > >> >> > technically true, it bothers me to just leave it there without > >> >> > pointing to a thread like this: > >> >> > > >> >> > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9154388/does-untyped-also-mean-dynamically-typed-in-the-academic-cs-world > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> Right, which does have some academics using it "incorrectly" too. > >> >> I almost put both but I figured more people would know what I meant > >> >> if I said untyped than dynamically typed. Hey, at least I didn't say > >> >> weakly typed. But yeah, dynamically typed is correct, my fault. > >> > > >> > There's one thing I think gets overlooked when considering Javascript, > >> > the browser is almost like a mini OS now and this is its native > >> > language. We could argue about terms like "scripting" language or > >> > "programming" language but, in my opinion, it'd be pretty silly to look > >> > at, say, a Javascript gaming engine and exclaim: 'That's not *real* > >> > programming!'. > >> > > >> > But hey, I'm just a novice at this stuff so take that into > >> > consideration, I know PK will ;) > >> > >> You have to make some really farfetching allowances to declare JavaScript > >> a "real" programming language. > >> You have to define a browser is "the OS" in order to get anywhere near > >> that. > >> > >> I myself am rather strict in my opinios about that. If a program language > >> can't be used to build programs which run on the bare OS, it isn't a > >> "prgramming language". Naturally nearly always there will be some > >> runtime- libraries, but I never would go that far to declare a browser a > >> "runtime library". So Java (as defined originally) just barely makes it. > >> Now normally Java is compiled, even if at runtime. JavaScript is just > >> that, a scripting language > > > > No question, but the lines are staring to blur more than they ever have. > > For example: > > > > http://tylergaw.com/articles/building-osx-apps-with-js > > Thats obviously good news for anyone using applescript, as that "language" > is by far the most hideous thing known to mankind. But that thingy will not > make it to anywhere outside of apple territory, and even there it will > remain a pile of crap My point was that Javascript isn't confined to the browser.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-01 21:31 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <20150401213113.4d5553b2@maxa-pc> |
| In reply to | #287256 |
On Wed, 1 Apr 2015 14:47:17 -0400 "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> wrote: > > > >"cc" <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote in message > >news:c855b3cb-57e7-40f1-8015-afbf1fcefbc3@googlegroups.com... > >On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 1:15:51 PM UTC-4, Steve Carroll wrote: > >> On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 10:37:38 AM UTC-6, Peter K_hlmann > >> wrote: > >> > Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> Well, what do you expect? Its from DFS > >> > > > >> > > He's got the IQ (and the vocabulary) of a mynah bird. > >> > > > >> > > >> > Well, mynah birds may be able to mimick speech. But they are > >> > still a lot > >> > smarter than DumbFullSnit. For example: They refrain from using > >> > VB as "programming language" > >> > >> I've seen you C variant snobs makes this claim about Javascript... > >> as it takes over the world ;) > > > >True. I hate untyped languages. And with growing popularity and usage > >there seems to be so much bad Javascript out there. And so many bad > >programmers who say they're Javascript programmers. Silicon Valley > >also gives it a bad rap. You get rich by becoming the next facebook. > >To make the next facebook, you need to know javascript. And so any > >idiot with a dumb idea writes some terrible Javascript code looking > >to cash in. > > > >So it's a little bit that I like untyped languages, a little bit that > >it's basically just a web browser language, and mostly because it's > >popular language (not just in usage, but in the media) so it attracts > >alot of people who have no business using it, and who don't know > >some basic programming ideas. > > > > > > It's untyped which is one issue. The other issue I have is that by > default you can just use variables without having to declare them. I > was never a fan of C where you had to declare vars at the beginning > of a scope and much better prefer the C++ way of declaring a variable > at the line it's used. Since c99, you can declare vars same as in C++,(yes even in for loop). > > But JavaScript doesn't require you to declare any variable anywhere > and I've been bitten by this. You make a typo and things sort-of work > but they don't really work because you've just assigned a value to > something other than the variable you wanted too. >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-01 15:38 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <mfhhdm$da2$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #287263 |
"Melzzzzz" <mel@zzzzz.com> wrote in message news:20150401213113.4d5553b2@maxa-pc... > On Wed, 1 Apr 2015 14:47:17 -0400 > "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> wrote: > >> > >> >"cc" <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote in message >> >news:c855b3cb-57e7-40f1-8015-afbf1fcefbc3@googlegroups.com... >> >On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 1:15:51 PM UTC-4, Steve Carroll wrote: >> >> On Wednesday, April 1, 2015 at 10:37:38 AM UTC-6, Peter K_hlmann >> >> wrote: >> >> > Chris Ahlstrom wrote: >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> > >> Well, what do you expect? Its from DFS >> >> > > >> >> > > He's got the IQ (and the vocabulary) of a mynah bird. >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > Well, mynah birds may be able to mimick speech. But they are >> >> > still a lot >> >> > smarter than DumbFullSnit. For example: They refrain from using >> >> > VB as "programming language" >> >> >> >> I've seen you C variant snobs makes this claim about Javascript... >> >> as it takes over the world ;) >> > >> >True. I hate untyped languages. And with growing popularity and usage >> >there seems to be so much bad Javascript out there. And so many bad >> >programmers who say they're Javascript programmers. Silicon Valley >> >also gives it a bad rap. You get rich by becoming the next facebook. >> >To make the next facebook, you need to know javascript. And so any >> >idiot with a dumb idea writes some terrible Javascript code looking >> >to cash in. >> > >> >So it's a little bit that I like untyped languages, a little bit that >> >it's basically just a web browser language, and mostly because it's >> >popular language (not just in usage, but in the media) so it attracts >> >alot of people who have no business using it, and who don't know >> >some basic programming ideas. >> > >> > >> >> It's untyped which is one issue. The other issue I have is that by >> default you can just use variables without having to declare them. I >> was never a fan of C where you had to declare vars at the beginning >> of a scope and much better prefer the C++ way of declaring a variable >> at the line it's used. > > Since c99, you can declare vars same as in C++,(yes even in for loop). Until every compiler we use supports the c99 standard then it doesn't help us any. We rarely use C these days anyway, it's always C++ unless we need to interface with external APIs. >> But JavaScript doesn't require you to declare any variable anywhere >> and I've been bitten by this. You make a typo and things sort-of work >> but they don't really work because you've just assigned a value to >> something other than the variable you wanted too. >> -- "The (Wright Brothers) craft barely moved, and was so poor aerodynamically its doubtful that it could have "flown" without a tailwind." Mark Kent - a Linux advocate <ucte84-mmh.ln1@ellandroad.demon.co.uk>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-02 08:20 -0700 |
| Subject | Ezekiel doesn't care, obviously. |
| Message-ID | <Jeff-Relf.Me@Apr.2{8.20A.Seattle.2015}> |
| In reply to | #287267 |
Ezekiel wrote: > We rarely use C these days anyway, it's always C++ > unless we need to interface with external APIs. You're not retired ? You use email for work then, no ? What email client do you use, WinXP's Outlook ? You never need to mix English, Math Symbols, Chinese and/or Russian fonts... or post plain·text tables ? Do you know why Mozilla Thunderbird is better than WinXP's Outlook ? You don't care, obviously. You don't need to care.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-02 12:01 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Ezekiel doesn't care, obviously. |
| Message-ID | <mfjp1n$v50$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #287429 |
"Jeff-Relf.Me" <@.> wrote in message
news:Jeff-Relf.Me@Apr.2{8.20A.Seattle.2015}...
> Ezekiel wrote:
>> We rarely use C these days anyway, it's always C++
>> unless we need to interface with external APIs.
>
> You're not retired ?
I still work.
> You use email for work then, no ?
My work email that the employer provides me with.
> What email client do you use, WinXP's Outlook ?
Lotus Notes.
> You never need to mix English, Math Symbols,
> Chinese and/or Russian fonts... or post plain·text tables ?
Rarely. If I do it's usually an attachement. I don't want to be entering
math symbols into Notes.
> Do you know why Mozilla Thunderbird is better than WinXP's Outlook ?
Thunderbird is my email client at home.
> You don't care, obviously.
> You don't need to care.
I'm not sure which of the above I'm supposed to care about and why?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-02 09:55 -0700 |
| Subject | Your Usenet skills reflect your email skills. |
| Message-ID | <Jeff-Relf.Me@Apr.2{9.55A.Seattle.2015}> |
| In reply to | #287434 |
Replying to me, you ( Ezekiel ) wrote: > > What email client do you use, WinXP's Outlook ? > > Lotus Notes. You must work for a large company, maybe IBM; so your options are limited. I use links, not attachments. So I can change the linked·to file after my email is sent. Also, I can check if the file was accessed or not, and when. Sometimes my links point to a password·protected site, or I password·protect the (.PDF) file itself. > > Do you know why Mozilla Thunderbird is better than WinXP's Outlook ? > > Thunderbird is my email client at home. Thunderbird is ·very· extendible; you can add|create (JavaScript) extensions for it. > > You don't care, obviously. > > You don't need to care. > > I'm not sure which of the above I'm supposed to care about and why? Your Usenet skills reflect your email skills. So, when I see someone using a 13 year old email client, I shudder a bit.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-04-02 13:37 -0400 |
| Subject | Re: Your Usenet skills reflect your email skills. |
| Message-ID | <mfjun5$mjt$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #287437 |
On 2015-04-02 12:55 PM, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote: > Replying to me, you ( Ezekiel ) wrote: >>> What email client do you use, WinXP's Outlook ? >> >> Lotus Notes. > > You must work for a large company, maybe IBM; > so your options are limited. > > I use links, not attachments. > So I can change the linked·to file after my email is sent. > Also, I can check if the file was accessed or not, and when. > > Sometimes my links point to a password·protected site, > or I password·protect the (.PDF) file itself. Your penis must be very large. -- Slimer OpenMedia, GreenPeace Supporter & SPCA Paw Partner Encrypt.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 21 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web