$
goo...@walkerwebworks.co.uk
there are $'s all over the place, can someone explain their uses
Richard Cornford
> what dose a $ do in javascript, i have been given a bit of code and
> there are $'s all over the place, can someone explain their uses
The dollar symbol in javascript is one of the characters that are
allowed in an Identifier, (and allowed at the beginning of an
Identifier, and so may be used as an entire Identifier).
The specification for javascript (ECMA 262) proposes that the only
reason that the dollar symbol was included in the set of characters
allowed in Identifiers is so that it could be used to signify machine
generated code (a notion apparently borrowed from Java). Regardless of
this the dollar symbol is often used in Identifiers where its uses is
unrelated to machine generated code.
The only meaning you can derive from observing a dollar symbol in
javascript source code (outside a string or regular expression
literal) is that it wither is and Identifier or is part of an
Identifier (and probably that the author of the code was not familiar
with the language's speci8fication, or not a sufficiently competent
programmer to see the value of following sensible naming conventions
when you what to write understandable code).
Richard.
Matt Kruse
> what dose a $ do in javascript, i have been given a bit of code and
> there are $'s all over the place, can someone explain their uses
By itself, it is meaningless. It's just like 'x'.
Some libraries define it as a function that is short for getElementById or
other similar 'selection' mechanisms. These libraries include Prototype,
jQuery, MooTools, etc.
Check to see if these or any other library code is included in the page.
<FAQENTRY>This really does deserve to be in there, IMO.
--
Matt Kruse
http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com
http://www.AjaxToolbox.com
Sean Inglis
> what dose a $ do in javascript, i have been given a bit of code and
> there are $'s all over the place, can someone explain their uses
Are you certain it's javascript?
Sounds more like perl/PHP - which may well *generate* client side JS.
How about posting a snippet?
Emmanuel
> what dose a $ do in javascript, i have been given a bit of code and
> there are $'s all over the place, can someone explain their uses
$ is also the metacharacter for "end of string" (or "end of line" with
the "m" modifier) in regular expressions.
Randy Webb
> goo...@walkerwebworks.co.uk wrote:
>> what dose a $ do in javascript, i have been given a bit of code and
>> there are $'s all over the place, can someone explain their uses
>
> By itself, it is meaningless. It's just like 'x'.
>
> Some libraries define it as a function that is short for getElementById or
> other similar 'selection' mechanisms. These libraries include Prototype,
> jQuery, MooTools, etc.
>
> Check to see if these or any other library code is included in the page.
>
> <FAQENTRY>This really does deserve to be in there, IMO.
The $ function from libraries or the idea of using functions as shortcut
wrappers?
--
Randy
Chance Favors The Prepared Mind
comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq/index.html
Javascript Best Practices - http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/
Jim Land
news:162dnaDfr8d...@telcove.net:
> Matt Kruse said the following on 2/16/2007 8:48 AM:
>> goo...@walkerwebworks.co.uk wrote:
>>> what dose a $ do in javascript, i have been given a bit of code and
>>> there are $'s all over the place, can someone explain their uses
>>
>> By itself, it is meaningless. It's just like 'x'.
>>
>> Some libraries define it as a function that is short for
>> getElementById or other similar 'selection' mechanisms. These
>> libraries include Prototype, jQuery, MooTools, etc.
>>
>> Check to see if these or any other library code is included in the
>> page.
>>
>> <FAQENTRY>This really does deserve to be in there, IMO.
>
> The $ function from libraries or the idea of using functions as
> shortcut wrappers?
>
The $ itself. I second the nomination and submit this first draft for
FAQ entry:
-----------------
What does $ mean in JS?
1. Identifier (Name of Variable)
The dollar symbol in javascript is one of the characters that are
allowed in an Identifier, (and allowed at the beginning of an
Identifier, and so may be used as an entire Identifier).
The specification for javascript (ECMA 262) proposes that the only
reason that the dollar symbol was included in the set of characters
allowed in Identifiers is so that it could be used to signify machine
generated code (a notion apparently borrowed from Java). Regardless of
this the dollar symbol is often used in Identifiers where its uses is
unrelated to machine generated code.
2. Regular Expression
In a regular expression, $ means "end of the line" or, with the /m
modifier, "over several lines, to the end of the string".
/abc$/ matches "abc" at the end of a line
/abc$/m matches "abc" at the end of a string
3. Function
Some libraries define $ as a function that is short for getElementById or
other similar 'selection' mechanisms. These libraries include Prototype,
jQuery, MooTools, etc.
$(firstdiv) might mean document.getElementById(firstdiv)
Martin Honnen
> 2. Regular Expression
> In a regular expression, $ means "end of the line" or, with the /m
> modifier, "over several lines, to the end of the string".
> /abc$/ matches "abc" at the end of a line
> /abc$/m matches "abc" at the end of a string
Without the m modifier/flag the $-character as a meta character matches
only the end of the string. With the m flag the $-character as a meta
character matches the end of a line and the end of a string. So your
description has it the wrong way.
--
Martin Honnen
http://JavaScript.FAQTs.com/
Martin Honnen
> What does $ mean in JS?
>
> 1. Identifier (Name of Variable)
> The dollar symbol in javascript is one of the characters that are
> allowed in an Identifier, (and allowed at the beginning of an
> Identifier, and so may be used as an entire Identifier).
> 3. Function
> Some libraries define $ as a function that is short for getElementById or
> other similar 'selection' mechanisms. These libraries include Prototype,
> jQuery, MooTools, etc.
> $(firstdiv) might mean document.getElementById(firstdiv)
3. should somehow relate to 1. as a function name is simply an identifier.
Evertjan.
Better as put by Mozilla.org specs:
"If the multiline flag is set to true, also matches immediately before a
line break character."
=======================================
2B. Regular Expression replace():
$1, $2, ..
$n is used to represent the nth captured submatch, where n is a single
decimal digit from 1 through 9 [or a double from 10 to 99], when $n is
included in the replace string.
Mozilla.org specifies:
$$ Inserts a "$".
$& Inserts the matched substring.
$` Inserts the portion of the string that precedes the matched substring.
$' Inserts the portion of the string that follows the matched substring.
$n or $nn Where n or nn are decimal digits, inserts the nth parenthesized
submatch string, provided the first argument was a RegExp object.
> 3. Function
> Some libraries define $ as a function that is short for getElementById
> or other similar 'selection' mechanisms. These libraries include
> Prototype, jQuery, MooTools, etc.
> $(firstdiv) might mean document.getElementById(firstdiv)
>
>
--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)
Randy Webb
<snip>
> 2. Regular Expression
> In a regular expression, $ means "end of the line" or, with the /m
> modifier, "over several lines, to the end of the string".
> /abc$/ matches "abc" at the end of a line
> /abc$/m matches "abc" at the end of a string
Is that unique to JS Regular Expressions or is it true in any language?
If it is true in any language, then it doesn't "mean" anything in JS
itself, does it?
> 3. Function
> Some libraries define $ as a function that is short for getElementById or
> other similar 'selection' mechanisms. These libraries include Prototype,
> jQuery, MooTools, etc.
> $(firstdiv) might mean document.getElementById(firstdiv)
"might mean"? That is *very* ambiguous. Heck, it "might mean"
eval(firstdiv). Very very ambiguous.
Richard Cornford
> Jim Land said the following on 2/17/2007 12:28 PM:
<snip>
>> Some libraries define $ as a function that is short for
>> getElementById or other similar 'selection' mechanisms.
>> These libraries include Prototype, jQuery, MooTools, etc. $(firstdiv)
>> might mean document.getElementById(firstdiv)
>
> "might mean"? That is *very* ambiguous. Heck, it "might mean"
> eval(firstdiv). Very very ambiguous.
Yes, the situation is that the dollar symbol should mean machine
generated code, but, if abused, might mean anything at all.
Richard.
Richard Cornford
> Randy Webb wrote in
>> Matt Kruse said the following on 2/16/2007 8:48 AM:
>>> <FA****RY>This really does deserve to be in there, IMO.
>>
>> The $ function from libraries or the idea of using
>> functions as shortcut wrappers?
>
> The $ itself. I second the nomination and submit this
> first draft for FAQ entry:
I don't think this qualifies as a frequently asked question. O wouldn't
be too surprised if it became a frequently asked question because some if
the inappropriate uses the dollar symbol have been put to are inherently
obscure.
Incidentally, it was not a good idea to make that addition to the subject
line of the thread.
> -----------------
>
> What does $ mean in JS?
>
> 1. Identifier (Name of Variable)
> The dollar symbol in javascript is one of the characters that
> are allowed in an Identifier, (and allowed at the beginning
> of an Identifier, and so may be used as an entire Identifier).
>
> The specification for javascript (ECMA 262) proposes that the
> only reason that the dollar symbol was included in the set of
> characters allowed in Identifiers is so that it could be used
> to signify machine generated code (a notion apparently borrowed
> from Java). Regardless of this the dollar symbol is often used
> in Identifiers where its uses is unrelated to machine generated
> code.
There is something familiar about that.
<snip>
> 3. Function
> Some libraries define $ as ...
<snip>
Over the years we have seen people justifying their 'appropriate' use of
the dollar symbol as a marker of Identifiers that contain string values,
for Identifiers that hold property names, for Property names that are
intended to be 'private' or 'internal' and as a means of signifying
functions that are intended for DOM interactions (to distinguish them
from pure JS functions). And there almost certainly have been other uses
proposed that have not stayed in my memory.
If any one abuse of dollar symbol is to be mentioned then all the others
should also (which is going to make any entry on the subject too bulky),
else any one mentioned may give the impression of that abuse being
endorsed.
Richard.
Jim Land
news:Xns98DA74C13A2FBRr...@216.168.3.44:
> The $ itself. I second the nomination and submit this first draft for
> FAQ entry:
>
> -----------------
>
> What does $ mean in JS?
>
> 1. Identifier (Name of Variable)
> The dollar symbol in javascript is one of the characters that are
> allowed in an Identifier, (and allowed at the beginning of an
> Identifier, and so may be used as an entire Identifier).
>
> The specification for javascript (ECMA 262) proposes that the only
> reason that the dollar symbol was included in the set of characters
> allowed in Identifiers is so that it could be used to signify machine
> generated code (a notion apparently borrowed from Java). Regardless of
> this the dollar symbol is often used in Identifiers where its uses is
> unrelated to machine generated code.
>
> 2. Regular Expression
> In a regular expression, $ means "end of the line" or, with the /m
> modifier, "over several lines, to the end of the string".
> /abc$/ matches "abc" at the end of a line
> /abc$/m matches "abc" at the end of a string
>
> 3. Function
> Some libraries define $ as a function that is short for getElementById
> or other similar 'selection' mechanisms. These libraries include
> Prototype, jQuery, MooTools, etc.
> $(firstdiv) might mean document.getElementById(firstdiv)
>
>
Thanks for the comments.
<FA****RY>
Second draft for poposed FAQ entry:
-----------------
What does $(x) mean in JS?
Javascript has no built-in function named $. However, some libraries
define $ as a function that is short for getElementById or
other similar 'selection' mechanisms. These libraries include Prototype,
jQuery, MooTools. To learn what the function does, it is necessary to
find the function's definition in the library.
Randy Webb
<snip>
> Thanks for the comments.
>
> <FA****RY>
>
> Second draft for poposed FAQ entry:
>
> -----------------
>
> What does $(x) mean in JS?
It means call a function named $ with x as the parameter to the
function. Nothing more, nothing less.
> Javascript has no built-in function named $. However, some libraries
> define $ as a function that is short for getElementById or
> other similar 'selection' mechanisms.
Since you list gEBI, do you list any/all other incarnations of a
function named $ ?
> These libraries include Prototype, jQuery, MooTools.
But are not limited to.
> To learn what the function does, it is necessary to
> find the function's definition in the library.
That is true with any user defined function. What makes $() so special
to get its own entry in the FAQ? Especially since it doesn't get asked
very often. Does the list then get expanded to include any function
names that appear in 3 or 4 different places?
This is precisely why I asked whether it was with regards to $() as a
function (as in Prototype, jQuery, etc) or if it was with regards to
using shortcut function wrappers.
Good Man
@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com:
> what dose a $ do in javascript, i have been given a bit of code and
> there are $'s all over the place, can someone explain their uses
>
No one has posted this yet... it could be a prototype.js function. So it
would return details of the id. If you had a form field somewhere in your
valid document called 'myName', you could call
var hisName = $('myName').value;
or disable the field by
$theField = $('myName');
$theField.disabled = true;
etc.... http://www.prototypejs.org/
RobG
> goo...@walkerwebworks.co.uk wrote in news:1171629858.224721.141050
> @s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com:
>
> > what dose a $ do in javascript, i have been given a bit of code and
> > there are $'s all over the place, can someone explain their uses
>
> No one has posted this yet... it could be a prototype.js function.
The second response, posted by Matt Kruse nearly two days ago,
mentions it.
--
Rob
-Lost
news:1171791450.6...@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
I had to laugh. The 3 responses above yours had me staring.
-Lost
VK
> Yes, the situation is that the dollar symbol should mean machine
> generated code, but, if abused, might mean anything at all.
Oh, con'on! Don't start this stuff again. One of major problems with
the FAQ before was exactly that it refused to answer to "unproper"
questions. So like "doesn't matter if the question is asked or not, it
simply shouldn't be asked - so cannot be proper answer for unproper
questions". Something like that... Moreover you did not plan to polish
to the endless perfection the same 3-10 years old set of questions, do
you?
Prototype.js was the first popular after-war library and it set a few
coding standards for all libraries to come, moreover it set some
standards for future DOM specs.
A sample of the first is $ identifier used as document.getDocumentById
shortcut or extension of this method.
A sample of the second is getElementsByClassName - an oftenly needed
method simply overlooked by W3C in DOM 1 and now coming in DOM 3.
So start making a virgin of yourself and answer in FAQ what asked.
:-)
:-|
VK
Randy Webb
> On Feb 18, 4:41 am, "Richard Cornford" <Rich...@litotes.demon.co.uk>
>> Yes, the situation is that the dollar symbol should mean machine
>> generated code, but, if abused, might mean anything at all.
>
> Oh, con'on! Don't start this stuff again. One of major problems with
> the FAQ before was exactly that it refused to answer to "unproper"
> questions.
Are you referring to questions like "How to round a number?" or "How to
create a Vector in JS?" or is it some other question that you have in
mind that has been asked to be added to the FAQ that was an "unproper
question"?
> So like "doesn't matter if the question is asked or not, it
> simply shouldn't be asked - so cannot be proper answer for unproper
> questions". Something like that... Moreover you did not plan to polish
> to the endless perfection the same 3-10 years old set of questions, do
> you?
You seem to have forgotten the last 4 months or so.
> Prototype.js was the first popular after-war library and it set a few
> coding standards for all libraries to come, moreover it set some
> standards for future DOM specs.
I have to admit I was wrong about you VK. I wondered a lot if you were
actually as dumb as I thought you were but I was wrong. You aren't even
that smart.
> A sample of the first is $ identifier used as document.getDocumentById
> shortcut or extension of this method.
Shortcut wrapper functions were used long before Prototype.js was even a
figment of the imagination of the people who wrote that text. But, are
you saying that $ is going to get included as a "shortcut or extension"
of the "document.getDocumentById" (Can you give me a URL to the
specification that explains how that works?)?
> A sample of the second is getElementsByClassName - an oftenly needed
> method simply overlooked by W3C in DOM 1 and now coming in DOM 3.
getElementsByClassName wasn't included in any potential DOM 3 specs
because it got included in Prototype.js. Far from it.
Richard Cornford
> On Feb 18, 4:41 am, Richard Cornford" wrote:
>> Yes, the situation is that the dollar symbol should mean machine
>> generated code, but, if abused, might mean anything at all.
>
> Oh, con'on! Don't start this stuff again.
What did I start? I did not write the language's specification, and I
have not imposed other meanings upon the use of the dollar symbol (with a
grand total of 9242 non-dollar symbol characters allowed at the front of
an Identifier by ECMA 262 3rd Ed. there is little reason to be using
characters that already have conventional meaning to signify anything
special).
> One of major problems with the FAQ before was exactly that it
> refused to answer to "unproper" questions. So like "doesn't matter
> if the question is asked or not, it simply shouldn't be asked - so
> cannot be proper answer for unproper questions". Something like
> that... Moreover you did not plan to polish to the endless
> perfection the same 3-10 years old set of questions, do you?
The ability to ask a question does not mean that the question can be (or
should be) answered. For example, the question "What is the meaning of
life?", if answered, pre-supposes that life is something that has
meaning. While that question may be as nonsensical as asking "What is the
meaning of gravity?".
> Prototype.js was the first ...
<snip>
To date nobody here but the OP has seen the code in question. We don't
know that it has anything to do with Prototype.js, or any other library
mimicking its errors. The actual code may be employing the dollar symbol
in any way at all (it may even be some of your 'code' which uses $ as
property names, and suffixes with $ to suggest 'private'). The bottom
line is that the dollar symbol has no inherent meaning beyond its being a
currency symbol, and its specified conventional meaning has been
disregarded so frequently that assuming that use (in a random, and
probably non-professionally authored script) is not realistic.
> A sample of the first is $ identifier used as document.getDocumentById
> shortcut or extension of this method.
>
> A sample of the second is getElementsByClassName - an oftenly needed
> method simply overlooked by W3C in DOM 1 and now coming in DOM 3.
You think the question of the meaning of the dollar symbol should receive
two mutually exclusive answers that each assert it has a specific
meaning? OK, we know you are irrational so that would not necessarily
seem untenable to you.
> So start making a virgin of yourself and answer in FAQ what asked.
The question asked was "what dose a $ do in javascript?", and the answer
is that the dollar symbol may form part of an Identifier, or may be a
character in a string literal or a character or symbol in a regular
expression. Saying anything else is not answering the question in terms
of "in javascript", and the question; 'what may the $ symbol used in an
Identifier mean in javascript?' can only receive the answer that it
should (by specification) mean machine generated code, but may mean
literally anything at all by the whim of the programmer using it.
Anything else would be objectively false.
Richard.
VK
> Are you referring to questions like "How to round a number?" or "How to
> create a Vector in JS?" or is it some other question that you have in
> mind that has been asked to be added to the FAQ that was an "unproper
> question"?
No, I mean questions like "what does $('str') mean, I see it all
around" - and I mean the holly right you and Mr.Cornford are trying to
reserve to answer: "this is unproper use of $ demonstrating the lack
of knowledge of however did this library".
On the bigger scale you are trying to reserve the right to call junk
on any more-or-less widely deployed library using 1999th chunk of
obscure mumbling from ECMAScript 3rd ed.
Respectively I suggested to both of you to shut up and stop pretending
that the language evolution is evolving around anyone of you. 1999 is
was one meaning for $, 2007 it is all another, 2015 it can be
something completely else.
> I have to admit I was wrong about you VK. I wondered a lot if you were
> actually as dumb as I thought you were but I was wrong. You aren't even
> that smart.
Let my IQ doesn't prevent you from a good sleep. The most important
that your self-estimate remains paramount high throughout the years.
Randy Webb
> On Feb 18, 6:08 pm, Randy Webb <HikksNotAtH...@aol.com> wrote:
>> Are you referring to questions like "How to round a number?" or "How to
>> create a Vector in JS?" or is it some other question that you have in
>> mind that has been asked to be added to the FAQ that was an "unproper
>> question"?
>
> No, I mean questions like "what does $('str') mean, I see it all
> around" - and I mean the holly right you and Mr.Cornford are trying to
> reserve to answer: "this is unproper use of $ demonstrating the lack
> of knowledge of however did this library".
"you and Mr. Cornford"? You have an opportunity, right now, to point to
anywhere in this thread where I have even come close to saying anything
even remotely close to what you are accusing me of having written.
Unless you can do that, you are just showing your ignorance again.
There are 4 (this will make #5) posts by me in this thread. Please point
to *anything* I have written/posted with regards to $ being "unproper
use of $". Until you can do that, shut up yourself lest you embarrass
yourself again.
> On the bigger scale you are trying to reserve the right to call junk
> on any more-or-less widely deployed library using 1999th chunk of
> obscure mumbling from ECMAScript 3rd ed.
1) I have not called Prototype junk in quite a while. If people want to
use it, let them. They deserve what they get.
2) With regards to me and ECMAScript, you should search the archives for
my name and ECMAScript and try to find even one - just one - thread
where I suggested anything that ECMA had to say. What you *will* find
are threads where I said I didn't give a flying crap what ECMA had to say.
> Respectively I suggested to both of you to shut up and stop pretending
> that the language evolution is evolving around anyone of you. 1999 is
> was one meaning for $, 2007 it is all another, 2015 it can be
> something completely else.
Me? Spouting about the "language evolution"? You must have me confused
with some figment of your imagination. Now, please back up that claim
with regards to me saying that. Or, even coming close.
And you actually wonder why I think you are a bona fide idiot?
Dr J R Stockton
, Sat, 17 Feb 2007 18:49:05, Evertjan. <exjxw.ha...@interxnl.net>
posted:
>
>2B. Regular Expression replace():
>$1, $2, ..
>
>$n is used to represent the nth captured submatch, where n is a single
>decimal digit from 1 through 9 [or a double from 10 to 99], when $n is
>included in the replace string.
>
>Mozilla.org specifies:
>$$ Inserts a "$".
>$& Inserts the matched substring.
>$` Inserts the portion of the string that precedes the matched substring.
>$' Inserts the portion of the string that follows the matched substring.
>$n or $nn Where n or nn are decimal digits, inserts the nth parenthesized
>submatch string, provided the first argument was a RegExp object.
>
2Bi. As above. Does $0 have a meaning?
2Bii. A reference to the use of RegExp.$1 etc. to refer to the results
of a match, with (IIRC) a statement that it is deprecated, and that ...
can/should be used instead.
That is, of course, if meanings of $ additional to function $ are to be
included, when the list should be complete as it is obviously intended
for code readers.
===
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/gravity4.htm> contains (/inter alia/)
a moderately-refined demonstration of the use of javascript for
producing one-dimensional pixel-accurate graphics. Try the two buttons
in the bluish box (perhaps with 9 instead of 81).
--
(c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Delphi 3? Turnpike 6.05
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> TP/BP/Delphi/&c., FAQqy topics & links;
<URL:http://www.bancoems.com/CompLangPascalDelphiMisc-MiniFAQ.htm> clpdmFAQ;
<URL:http://www.borland.com/newsgroups/guide.html> news:borland.* Guidelines
Dr J R Stockton
, Sun, 18 Feb 2007 15:17:40, Richard Cornford
<Ric...@litotes.demon.co.uk> posted:
>
>What did I start? I did not write the language's specification, and I
>have not imposed other meanings upon the use of the dollar symbol (with
>a grand total of 9242 non-dollar symbol characters allowed at the front
>of an Identifier by ECMA 262 3rd Ed. there is little reason to be using
>characters that already have conventional meaning to signify anything
>special).
Now \u0624 is probably a letter; I'll represent it here by X. X can be
put between ab and cd, and the resulting 5-letter word abXcd works (IE6
textarea, eval) as an identifier.
But try typing, into an "anglo" IE6 control, X = 5 or X == 5 ,
and one gets 5 = X and 5 == X ; the latter will please at least
one of us.
While the use of non-European characters is at most rarely asked here,
and surely does not qualify for a FAQ entry of its own; ISTM that, if a
page on the subject of typing characters from reversed languages (not
necessarily in script identifiers) can be found, it could well be right
to link to it from FAQ 2.10.
--
(c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
Proper <= 4-line sig. separator as above, a line exactly "-- " (SonOfRFC1036)
Do not Mail News to me. Before a reply, quote with ">" or "> " (SonOfRFC1036)
Richard Cornford
<snip>
> Now \u0624 is probably a letter; ...
<snip>
According to my reference it is "Arabic letter Waw with Hamza above"
(which was worth the effort of looking up :-) It is in the "Lo" ("other
letter") Unicode category and so is a UnicodeLetter according to
ECMAScript syntax, and a valid IdentifierStart.
Richard.
Randy Webb
> VK said the following on 2/18/2007 1:00 PM:
<snip>
>> Respectively I suggested to both of you to shut up and stop pretending
>> that the language evolution is evolving around anyone of you. 1999 is
>> was one meaning for $, 2007 it is all another, 2015 it can be
>> something completely else.
>
> Me? Spouting about the "language evolution"? You must have me confused
> with some figment of your imagination. Now, please back up that claim
> with regards to me saying that. Or, even coming close.
>
> And you actually wonder why I think you are a bona fide idiot?
I will take your lack of proof as evidence of you either realizing you
are as dumb/stupid as I thought you were or your realization of how
severely wrong you are (as usual).
VK
> I will take your lack of proof as evidence of you either realizing you
> are as dumb/stupid as I thought you were or your realization of how
> severely wrong you are (as usual).
Are you positionning yourself as verbally abused by VK in this thread
- in response to your polit arguments - something like this?
<faqentry>
What does $(arg) call mean in JS?
The dollar symbol in javascript is one of the characters that are
allowed to be a part of an identifier, allowed at the beginning of an
identifier and so may be used as an entire identifier.
The language specification ECMAScript-262 3rd ed. tells that the
identifiers starting with $ sign should be used to signify machine
generated code (a notion apparently borrowed from Java). Regardless of
this the dollar symbol is often used in Identifiers where its uses is
unrelated to machine generated code.
Many libraries define $ as a function which is shortcut replacement
for document.getElementById method or which is customary extended DOM
elements selection method. These libraries include Prototype (where
the original use come from), jQuery, MooTools, etc.
</faqentry>
The meaning and usage of $ sign in regular expressions should be
removed as irrelevant. We don't create a FAQ for "what does ^ mean?"
or "what does /^foo$/ mean?" - so same for $.
Randy Webb
> On Feb 23, 4:05 am, Randy Webb <HikksNotAtH...@aol.com> wrote:
>> I will take your lack of proof as evidence of you either realizing you
>> are as dumb/stupid as I thought you were or your realization of how
>> severely wrong you are (as usual).
>
> Are you positionning yourself as verbally abused by VK in this thread
> - in response to your polit arguments - something like this?
No, I want you to back up your claims such as this:
<quote>
and I mean the holly right you and Mr.Cornford are trying to
reserve to answer: "this is unproper use of $ demonstrating the lack
of knowledge of however did this library".
</snip>
In which the "you" is referring to me.
If you want more of your preposterous claims then simply read the
messages in this thread where I have replied to you. Especially with
regards to $ and/or ECMA
> <faqentry>
> What does $(arg) call mean in JS?
Technically speaking, it means a function named $ is being called with
an argument. I have said that before (in this thread no less). That is
what it means and not a hill of beans more.
> The dollar symbol in javascript is one of the characters that are
> allowed to be a part of an identifier, allowed at the beginning of an
> identifier and so may be used as an entire identifier.
Nice info from Richard but it is irrelevant to the question you have
modified to use in your faqentry request.
> The language specification ECMAScript-262 3rd ed. tells that the
> identifiers starting with $ sign should be used to signify machine
> generated code (a notion apparently borrowed from Java). Regardless of
> this the dollar symbol is often used in Identifiers where its uses is
> unrelated to machine generated code.
Still irrelevant to the question you pose.
> Many libraries define $ as a function which is shortcut replacement
> for document.getElementById method or which is customary extended DOM
> elements selection method. These libraries include Prototype (where
> the original use come from), jQuery, MooTools, etc.
> </faqentry>
And you still didn't answer the question you posed. What does $(arg)
mean in JS? (The original question was "What does $ mean in JS?" which
is a totally different question). As you stated the question, it means
what I said above. Nothing more, nothing less. A function named $ was
called with an argument of a variable named arg.
> The meaning and usage of $ sign in regular expressions should be
> removed as irrelevant. We don't create a FAQ for "what does ^ mean?"
> or "what does /^foo$/ mean?" - so same for $.
So, you want an entry (based on your faqentry above) on a single
function name yet you argue against specialized entries? Think about
that one for a while. Then realize that you requested an entry and then
you yourself said we don't do it.
VK
> No, I want you to back up your claims such as this:
<snip>
I may think about it - depending on your good behavior.
:-)
> > <faqentry>
> > What does $(arg) call mean in JS?
>
> Technically speaking, it means a function named $ is being called with
> an argument. I have said that before (in this thread no less). That is
> what it means and not a hill of beans more.
In many languages $ at the beginning of the identifier or after it
(more rarely) indicates the nature of stored value and not a part of
identifier itself.
It is commonly believed that $ cannot be a part of indentifier in
javascript, so a statement like $(arg) knocks out of many.
$ as identifier was used in Prototype exactly for this reason: because
it was as short as possible yet hard to expect in 3rd party scripts.
That is Perl concept/school behind I guess.
It is important to explain that
$ is OK as part of identifier
$ is OK as identifier by itself
$ is identifier, not modifier
so:
> > The dollar symbol in javascript is one of the characters that are
> > allowed to be a part of an identifier, allowed at the beginning of an
> > identifier and so may be used as an entire identifier.
>
> > The language specification ECMAScript-262 3rd ed. tells that the
> > identifiers starting with $ sign should be used to signify machine
> > generated code (a notion apparently borrowed from Java). Regardless of
> > this the dollar symbol is often used in Identifiers where its uses is
> > unrelated to machine generated code.
>
> Still irrelevant to the question you pose.
Pretty much is. It was just to satisfy strict standard demands if one
wish. I don't care if removed.
> > Many libraries define $ as a function which is shortcut replacement
> > for document.getElementById method or which is customary extended DOM
> > elements selection method. These libraries include Prototype (where
> > the original use come from), jQuery, MooTools, etc.
> > </faqentry>
> And you still didn't answer the question you posed. What does $(arg)
> mean in JS? (The original question was "What does $ mean in JS?" which
> is a totally different question). As you stated the question, it means
> what I said above. Nothing more, nothing less. A function named $ was
> called with an argument of a variable named arg.
Yes, like f(arg), a(arg) etc. Funny enough no one asked yet what does
f(arg) mean in javascript.
I'm affraid you are still missing i) what the difficulties are to take
$(arg) just like f(arg) - that is answered in the 1st part of the
proposed text and ii) why one should avoid creating $ functions and
variables left and right just to make her code look "cool" - that is
answered in the 2nd part.
Randy Webb
> On Feb 23, 8:44 pm, Randy Webb <HikksNotAtH...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> No, I want you to back up your claims such as this:
> <snip>
>
> I may think about it - depending on your good behavior.
>
> :-)
Your silence speaks volumes in and of itself. You have still failed to
back up your claims and in light of that you leave me no choice but to
believe you are full of it (as I already knew) and that leads me back to
my original conclusion about you.
>>> <faqentry>
>>> What does $(arg) call mean in JS?
>> Technically speaking, it means a function named $ is being called with
>> an argument. I have said that before (in this thread no less). That is
>> what it means and not a hill of beans more.
>
> In many languages $ at the beginning of the identifier or after it
> (more rarely) indicates the nature of stored value and not a part of
> identifier itself.
What happens in any non-JS language is irrelevant to JS itself.
> It is commonly believed that $ cannot be a part of indentifier in
> javascript, so a statement like $(arg) knocks out of many.
"commonly believed" by who? I don't think any regular in this group
(except maybe you) has any problem understand what is - or isn't -
allowed in JS.
> $ as identifier was used in Prototype exactly for this reason:
Are you a Prototype developer or have some inside insight as to why they
used $? I would be interested in seeing it. Or, is that just another VK
guess?
> because it was as short as possible yet hard to expect in 3rd party scripts.
I can come up with better function names than $ and most of mine
indicate what they are doing. That isn't a benefit of Prototype, it is a
drawback. gEBI can be self-documenting (of sorts) but aSDF() doesn't
give an indication of what the function does. That is a drawback, not a
benefit, to maintaining/modifying code.
> That is Perl concept/school behind I guess.
> It is important to explain that
> $ is OK as part of identifier
> $ is OK as identifier by itself
> $ is identifier, not modifier
It is "important" to who? It is semi-important to the original question
about $ in code but it has absolutely *nothing* to do with the question
you posed of "What does $(arg) call mean in JS?" of which I have given a
very concise answer to that question at least 3 times.
> so:
>
>>> The dollar symbol in javascript is one of the characters that are
>>> allowed to be a part of an identifier, allowed at the beginning of an
>>> identifier and so may be used as an entire identifier.
Still irrelevant to the question you posed for the FAQ.
>>> The language specification ECMAScript-262 3rd ed. tells that the
>>> identifiers starting with $ sign should be used to signify machine
>>> generated code (a notion apparently borrowed from Java). Regardless of
>>> this the dollar symbol is often used in Identifiers where its uses is
>>> unrelated to machine generated code.
>> Still irrelevant to the question you pose.
>
> Pretty much is. It was just to satisfy strict standard demands if one
> wish.
So you think that the $ being intended to signify machine generated code
relevant to the specific question you proposed of "What does $(arg) call
mean in JS?" It doesn't. You could change your question to "What does
functionName(arg) call mean in JS?" and the answer to both is the same
and has absolutely nothing to do with the intentions for the use of $ in JS.
> I don't care if removed.
That is hilarious considering your entire text has nothing to do with
the question you posed for it.
>>> Many libraries define $ as a function which is shortcut replacement
>>> for document.getElementById method or which is customary extended DOM
>>> elements selection method. These libraries include Prototype (where
>>> the original use come from), jQuery, MooTools, etc.
>>> </faqentry>
>
>> And you still didn't answer the question you posed. What does $(arg)
>> mean in JS? (The original question was "What does $ mean in JS?" which
>> is a totally different question). As you stated the question, it means
>> what I said above. Nothing more, nothing less. A function named $ was
>> called with an argument of a variable named arg.
>
> Yes, like f(arg), a(arg) etc. Funny enough no one asked yet what does
> f(arg) mean in javascript.
I have only seen one, maybe two, questions asked about what $(arg) does
either. Hardly qualifies as "Frequently" asked.
> I'm affraid you are still missing i) what the difficulties are to take
> $(arg) just like f(arg) -
It seems to be you that is missing the meaning of it. The *only
difference in these two lines of code:
$(arg);
f(arg);
Is what function is called. They both do exactly the same thing - they
call a function (if it exists) with a parameter. Nothing more, nothing less.
> that is answered in the 1st part of the proposed text and
No it doesn't. The proposed text answers a possible question along the
lines of "What possible problems might arise from naming my function $
or $text?" But it doesn't answer the question you posed.
> ii) why one should avoid creating $ functions and
> variables left and right just to make her code look "cool" - that is
> answered in the 2nd part.
No, the second part explains ECMA's position on the use of $ and $text
as function names. It does not answer why you should avoid creating $
functions (there is no good reason in 2007 to abide by that) and there
isn't a reason until some UA decides to mangle $text function names.
Now, back to my challenge. Either back up your claim about what I have
said with regards to $ and/or ECMA or admit your a windbag that is
ranting about nothing. As for ECMA, you seem to quote it a lot more than
I do (You won't find anywhere in the archives where I quoted ECMA unless
I was replying to someone else's quote of it). So, let me say it for the
record - once again - ok? Try to keep up here:
1) I don't give a flying mouse's rear end what ECMA says.
2) I don't give a flying mouse's rear end whether people name functions
$ or
myMamasCustomFunctionToDoNothingButReturnAReferenceToAnElementBasedOnItsIDAndJustAWrapperForgetElementById
3) What I *do* care about is - gasp - browser behavior with code.
Dr J R Stockton
Sat, 24 Feb 2007 13:32:29, Randy Webb <HikksNo...@aol.com> posted:
>VK said the following on 2/23/2007 1:47 PM:
>> In many languages $ at the beginning of the identifier or after it
>> (more rarely) indicates the nature of stored value and not a part of
>> identifier itself.
>
>What happens in any non-JS language is irrelevant to JS itself.
However, it has a considerable influence on what newcomers, few of whom
will have started by reading ISO/IEC 16262, are likely to believe.
Therefore, it can legitimately influence the contents of the FAQ.
>> It is commonly believed that $ cannot be a part of indentifier in
>> javascript, so a statement like $(arg) knocks out of many.
>
>"commonly believed" by who? I don't think any regular in this group
>(except maybe you) has any problem understand what is - or isn't -
>allowed in JS.
But instructing the regulars is only a minor part of the job of a FAQ.
Its main purposes are to prevent the more thoughtful newcomers from
asking well-known questions, and to provide a reference which regulars
can quote in order to answer such questions concisely.
>> $ as identifier was used in Prototype exactly for this reason:
>
>Are you a Prototype developer or have some inside insight as to why
>they used $? I would be interested in seeing it. Or, is that just
>another VK guess?
>
>> because it was as short as possible yet hard to expect in 3rd party scripts.
>
>I can come up with better function names than $ and most of mine
>indicate what they are doing. That isn't a benefit of Prototype, it is
>a drawback. gEBI can be self-documenting (of sorts) but aSDF() doesn't
>give an indication of what the function does. That is a drawback, not a
>benefit, to maintaining/modifying code.
That is a false argument when applied to something which is expected to
be used so often that its purpose will certainly be remembered.
>1) I don't give a flying mouse's rear end what ECMA says.
>2) I don't give a flying mouse's rear end whether people name functions
>$ or myMamasCustomFunctionToDoNothingButReturnAReferenceToAnElementBase
>dOnItsIDAndJustAWrapperForgetElementById
>3) What I *do* care about is - gasp - browser behavior with code.
Standards compliance and browser compliance are both important. You'll
be aware that, to reach the fullest audience, one cannot be guided
*only* by the standards and one *cannot* be guided only by what MSIE
accepts.
The second identifier conflicts, for most people, with what the FAQ says
about code posted here.
--
(c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> TP/BP/Delphi/&c., FAQqy topics & links;
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/clpb-faq.txt> RAH Prins : c.l.p.b mFAQ;
<URL:ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/link/tsfaqp.zip> Timo Salmi's Turbo Pascal FAQ.
Randy Webb
> In comp.lang.javascript message <Wv-dnYizK7z...@telcove.net>,
> Sat, 24 Feb 2007 13:32:29, Randy Webb <HikksNo...@aol.com> posted:
>> VK said the following on 2/23/2007 1:47 PM:
>
>>> In many languages $ at the beginning of the identifier or after it
>>> (more rarely) indicates the nature of stored value and not a part of
>>> identifier itself.
>> What happens in any non-JS language is irrelevant to JS itself.
>
> However, it has a considerable influence on what newcomers, few of whom
> will have started by reading ISO/IEC 16262, are likely to believe.
> Therefore, it can legitimately influence the contents of the FAQ.
You are under the impression that newcomers will even know to search out
the FAQ.
>>> It is commonly believed that $ cannot be a part of indentifier in
>>> javascript, so a statement like $(arg) knocks out of many.
>> "commonly believed" by who? I don't think any regular in this group
>> (except maybe you) has any problem understand what is - or isn't -
>> allowed in JS.
>
> But instructing the regulars is only a minor part of the job of a FAQ.
You don't want an FAQ, you want a QTMBA document.
<snip>
>> 1) I don't give a flying mouse's rear end what ECMA says.
>> 2) I don't give a flying mouse's rear end whether people name functions
>> $ or myMamasCustomFunctionToDoNothingButReturnAReferenceToAnElementBase
>> dOnItsIDAndJustAWrapperForgetElementById
>> 3) What I *do* care about is - gasp - browser behavior with code.
>
> Standards compliance and browser compliance are both important.
Standards compliance is irrelevant. Whether it be with ECMA, ISO, or any
other organization that is not directly involved with the creation of a
browser. Not sure what you term as "browser compliance". Whether it is
compliance with the "specs" (which is irrelevant to me) or whether it is
my code that is compliant with the browser. If my code doesn't error out
to the user and works where I want it to work, then I don't give a
flying mouse's rear end whether it meets any "specs" or not.
> You'll be aware that, to reach the fullest audience, one cannot be guided
> *only* by the standards and one *cannot* be guided only by what MSIE
> accepts.
I am well aware of that and said nothing to the contrary. Nor have I
ever been "guided by only what MSIE accepts". You are also aware, or
should be, that there are places where MSIE follows "the specs" but
Mozilla/Opera fall on their face (and vice versa). Being "standards
compliant" doesn't mean a hill of beans in the end. What matters - in
the end - is what browsers do with the code. Nothing more, nothing less.
Dr J R Stockton
Sat, 24 Feb 2007 20:59:24, Randy Webb <HikksNo...@aol.com> posted:
>Dr J R Stockton said the following on 2/24/2007 6:21 PM:
>> In comp.lang.javascript message <Wv-dnYizK7z...@telcove.net>,
>> Sat, 24 Feb 2007 13:32:29, Randy Webb <HikksNo...@aol.com> posted:
>>> What happens in any non-JS language is irrelevant to JS itself.
>> However, it has a considerable influence on what newcomers, few of
>>whom
>> will have started by reading ISO/IEC 16262, are likely to believe.
>> Therefore, it can legitimately influence the contents of the FAQ.
>
>You are under the impression that newcomers will even know to search
>out the FAQ.
Sadly, most will not before their first post. Happily, most will be
told about the FAQ in the responses to their first post or to one of
their early posts. They remain newcomers.
>> But instructing the regulars is only a minor part of the job of a
>>FAQ.
>
>You don't want an FAQ, you want a QTMBA document.
You should read the FAQ on the purpose for which it was created. If you
want to write a document with contents not in accordance with that, then
feel free to do so - but a different document.
--
(c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ???@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
Check boilerplate spelling -- error is a public sign of incompetence.
Never fully trust an article from a poster who gives no full real name.
Randy Webb
> In comp.lang.javascript message <3uadnYSQbr2...@telcove.net>,
> Sat, 24 Feb 2007 20:59:24, Randy Webb <HikksNo...@aol.com> posted:
>> Dr J R Stockton said the following on 2/24/2007 6:21 PM:
>>> In comp.lang.javascript message <Wv-dnYizK7z...@telcove.net>,
>>> Sat, 24 Feb 2007 13:32:29, Randy Webb <HikksNo...@aol.com> posted:
>
>>>> What happens in any non-JS language is irrelevant to JS itself.
>>> However, it has a considerable influence on what newcomers, few of
>>> whom
>>> will have started by reading ISO/IEC 16262, are likely to believe.
>>> Therefore, it can legitimately influence the contents of the FAQ.
>> You are under the impression that newcomers will even know to search
>> out the FAQ.
>
> Sadly, most will not before their first post.
Precisely the point.
VK
> Your silence speaks volumes in and of itself. You have still failed to
> back up your claims and in light of that you leave me no choice but to
> believe you are full of it (as I already knew) and that leads me back to
> my original conclusion about you.
Whatever I said you said you did not say. In fact you say that I
said , briefly hell on $() if you insist so much. I'm finally resting
after two crazy weeks, zipping whiskey, listening ice cubes playing
and willing to answer to nothing but "how to declare global variable
in javascript" and similar. Some later I may remind you my very old
question "When and by what criteria a question should be made a FAQ?"
which remained unanswered so far. Some later.
-Lost
news:1172438935.2...@h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
I am beginning to think that at least 30% of why most think you are a raving idiot, is
your continual abuse of the English language.
Quite frankly, I did not understand a damn thing you just said.
-Lost
Randy Webb
Be careful or you will have something in common with VK as he didn't
understand 99% of what he just said :-)
VK
wrote:
> I am beginning to think that at least 30% of why most think you are a raving idiot, is
> your continual abuse of the English language.
-Losty, you are still on probation so behave yourself. Quod licet Jovi
non licet bovi.
;-)
> Quite frankly, I did not understand a damn thing you just said.
That is because you are still newcomer in c.l.j. but you are
participating in discussions originated from previous topics without
studying those topics - in hope to grasp everything from a run-time
context. How to update FAQ and how to add new / remove current FAQ was
discussed prior Randy Webb became FAQ maintainer.
I insisted on some formal procedure of voting, Randy Webb insisted on
relaxed "by common sense" way - and the latter was chosen.
I doubt very much that it will ever be some "Chartist movement" for a
particular FAQ with dozens of requests per day "add it! add it!" - so
the choice would become clear obvious. It will be merely the same as
with this thread: several similar questions, a proposal to add a FAQ
(Jim Land) then textual and factual corrections - so 2-5 people in
total. And then FAQ maintainer simply states "not necessary" for
whatever reason - an ambiguous word, one of 2(3) "voters" is remotely
detected as an idiot etc.
P.S. This is all irrelevant to my appreciation of Randy Webb works
over FAQ maintenance.
VK
www.jibbering.com/faq/index.html>
I mean _anyone_ even if you just learned how to insert javascript onto
HTML page. Actually the latter feedback is especially useful as such
people are among the FAQ target audience.
At the same time it is expected to see on request a basic knowledge of
clj FAQ history: names of kings, dates and results of main battles,
current trends etc.
Here are some links to make the studies less difficult.
:-)
------------------------------------------------------------------
Group creation. The very first FAQ version (1996) by Andy Augustine (a
replica)
<http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/msg/
7b2a3100608da41e>
comp.lang.javascript FAQ: 1996-2006
Primitive democracy. Centralization. FAQ Maintainer institution.
<http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/msg/
8954de60cffe6dab>
Stagnation. Cornford the Proud. Attempt of deposition. August triumvir
(August 2006, Ley-Cornford-Van der Donck)
Part 1 <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/browse_frm/
thread/b5c32520edf6db97>
Part 2 <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/browse_frm/
thread/2aa1140c148de30b>
Ides of November. End of August triumvir. Fights over the future.
Randy Webb.
Part 1 <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/browse_frm/
thread/7c4b17e65bb562dc>
Part 2 <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/browse_frm/
thread/edc1c6099a545e63>
Bart Van der Donck is leaving. Randy Webb is alone. Jim Ley as "Deus
ex machina" (or better "Deus cum machina" ?).
<http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/browse_frm/thread/
feffee3b32fc4c71>
FAQ feature hold. Current questions.
<http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/browse_frm/thread/
17bc937f0ede5fa1>
<http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/browse_frm/thread/
ef91ca87b5fbb965>
------------------------------------------------------------------
:-)
Randy Webb
> On Feb 26, 4:23 am, "-Lost" <spam_ninjaREMOV...@REMOVEMEcomcast.net>
> wrote:
>> I am beginning to think that at least 30% of why most think you are a raving idiot, is
>> your continual abuse of the English language.
>
> -Losty, you are still on probation so behave yourself. Quod licet Jovi
> non licet bovi.
>
> ;-)
>
>> Quite frankly, I did not understand a damn thing you just said.
>
> That is because you are still newcomer in c.l.j. but you are
> participating in discussions originated from previous topics without
> studying those topics - in hope to grasp everything from a run-time
> context. How to update FAQ and how to add new / remove current FAQ was
> discussed prior Randy Webb became FAQ maintainer.
Before, during and after.
> I insisted on some formal procedure of voting, Randy Webb insisted on
> relaxed "by common sense" way - and the latter was chosen.
I didn't insist, I chose it as the best way as the "formal procedure"
you proposed had more flaws than benefits.
> I doubt very much that it will ever be some "Chartist movement" for a
> particular FAQ with dozens of requests per day "add it! add it!" - so
> the choice would become clear obvious.
Precisely the reason I chose the way I do it. Even now, there is almost
a daily new thread on wanted changes. And that is just a result of the
daily postings.
> It will be merely the same as with this thread: several similar
> questions, a proposal to add a FAQ (Jim Land) then textual and
> factual corrections - so 2-5 people in total.
And to date, the question proposed (both of them) has not had a decent
answer provided except the one I gave which is a totally 100% factually
correct answer. If you want the answer you gave, then make the subject
meaningful.
> And then FAQ maintainer simply states "not necessary" for
> whatever reason - an ambiguous word, one of 2(3) "voters" is remotely
> detected as an idiot etc.
I never said "not necessary", I asked where you draw the line on what
you want to explain.
> P.S. This is all irrelevant to my appreciation of Randy Webb works
> over FAQ maintenance.
Speaking of which, as soon as I have time tonight the intentions are to
create a second profile for FAQEditor along with the email address for
it so that posts coming from that name are coming as the Editor (mostly
announcements of modifications/additions/deletions) and that will leave
this name for me to discuss as a Regular to this group. Trying to do
both from the same name makes it difficult to know which position I am
in when writing and when being read.
For the record: Nothing in this thread, written by me, was written as
the Editor of the FAQ, it was written as a Regular Contributor to this
group.
Randy Webb
> On Feb 24, 9:32 pm, Randy Webb <HikksNotAtH...@aol.com> wrote:
>> Your silence speaks volumes in and of itself. You have still failed to
>> back up your claims and in light of that you leave me no choice but to
>> believe you are full of it (as I already knew) and that leads me back to
>> my original conclusion about you.
>
> Whatever I said you said you did not say.
And it only took me three tries to get you to admit that.
> In fact you say that I said , briefly hell on $() if you insist so much.
I didn't say that.
I'm finally resting
> after two crazy weeks, zipping whiskey, listening ice cubes playing
> and willing to answer to nothing but "how to declare global variable
> in javascript" and similar.
I doubt you are even qualified to answer a question that simple.
> Some later I may remind you my very old question "When and by
> what criteria a question should be made a FAQ?" which remained
> unanswered so far. Some later.
Sadly, that is true. I have said from the start that as an Editor I
didn't care, it was up to the group. Have you noticed that you haven't
seen more than 4 or 5 people discussing this question? Not very much of
a consensus to change anything :-\
-Lost
> On Feb 26, 4:23 am, "-Lost" <spam_ninjaREMOV...@REMOVEMEcomcast.net>
> wrote:
>> I am beginning to think that at least 30% of why most think you are a raving idiot, is
>> your continual abuse of the English language.
>
> -Losty, you are still on probation so behave yourself. Quod licet Jovi
> non licet bovi.
Firstly, it is "Quod licet Iovi non licet bovi."
Secondly, you are nowhere near godly or god-like, not in mindset nor speech.
>> Quite frankly, I did not understand a damn thing you just said.
>
> That is because you are still newcomer in c.l.j. but you are
> participating in discussions originated from previous topics without
> studying those topics - in hope to grasp everything from a run-time
> context.
I have been reading the thread (originally titled "$") since its beginning.
The entire reason you have a general failure to grasp concepts is your insistence on
making things up as you go along. Much like what you just said.
<snipped further BS>
-Lost
VK
wrote:
> Firstly, it is "Quod licet Iovi non licet bovi."
Oh, cognoscitis lingua latina? Bene.
> Secondly, you are nowhere near godly or god-like, not in mindset nor speech.
Who said (I)Jovi == VK? That was about two persons doing the same
thing against a 3rd party ;-)
> I have been reading the thread (originally titled "$") since its beginning.
That is the reason of my light bias left from the last thread. You are
reading what others have to say and then join to the most loud party.
Or maybe I'm mistaken.
The subject was consisting out of two parts:
1) Is "what does $(arg) mean?" asked frequently enough on clj?
2) What is the reason of non-understanding - thus what points should
be clarified if promoted into FAQ.
If you really wanted to help - or argue with me - I would expect a
post like "in 3 months no one asked that, search yourselve" or like
"the main point of misunderstanding is X, see yourselve posts ID1,
ID2, ID3".
Because Google Usenet search is currently FUBAR, I did not make such
post neither - but at least I remember at least 5-7 recent enough
posts to support my vision of the FAQ necessity and the FAQ content. I
do not imply it is the only one correct vision - but at least it is
not based on how many times this or that person was called idiot in a
single thread.
Dr J R Stockton
Sun, 25 Feb 2007 16:28:20, Randy Webb <HikksNo...@aol.com> posted:
>Dr J R Stockton said the following on 2/25/2007 9:29 AM:
>> In comp.lang.javascript message <3uadnYSQbr2...@telcove.net>,
>> Sat, 24 Feb 2007 20:59:24, Randy Webb <HikksNo...@aol.com> posted:
>>> Dr J R Stockton said the following on 2/24/2007 6:21 PM:
>>>> In comp.lang.javascript message <Wv-dnYizK7z...@telcove.net>,
>>>> Sat, 24 Feb 2007 13:32:29, Randy Webb <HikksNo...@aol.com> posted:
>>
>>>>> What happens in any non-JS language is irrelevant to JS itself.
>>>> However, it has a considerable influence on what newcomers, few of
>>>> whom
>>>> will have started by reading ISO/IEC 16262, are likely to believe.
>>>> Therefore, it can legitimately influence the contents of the FAQ.
>>> You are under the impression that newcomers will even know to search
>>> out the FAQ.
>> Sadly, most will not before their first post.
>
>Precisely the point.
Selective quoting again - have you no morals? You should have quoted at
least "Sadly, most will not before their first post. Happily, most will
be told about the FAQ in the responses to their first post or to one of
their early posts." and probably also "They remain newcomers.".
But remember what WSC is said to have said about Americans.
-Lost
news:TFDBkHtO...@invalid.uk.co.demon.merlyn.invalid...
> In comp.lang.javascript message <-8-dnddC8fX...@telcove.net>,
> Sun, 25 Feb 2007 16:28:20, Randy Webb <HikksNo...@aol.com> posted:
>>Dr J R Stockton said the following on 2/25/2007 9:29 AM:
>>> In comp.lang.javascript message <3uadnYSQbr2...@telcove.net>,
>>> Sat, 24 Feb 2007 20:59:24, Randy Webb <HikksNo...@aol.com> posted:
>>>> Dr J R Stockton said the following on 2/24/2007 6:21 PM:
>>>>> In comp.lang.javascript message <Wv-dnYizK7z...@telcove.net>,
>>>>> Sat, 24 Feb 2007 13:32:29, Randy Webb <HikksNo...@aol.com> posted:
>>>
>>>>>> What happens in any non-JS language is irrelevant to JS itself.
>>>>> However, it has a considerable influence on what newcomers, few of
>>>>> whom
>>>>> will have started by reading ISO/IEC 16262, are likely to believe.
>>>>> Therefore, it can legitimately influence the contents of the FAQ.
>>>> You are under the impression that newcomers will even know to search
>>>> out the FAQ.
>>> Sadly, most will not before their first post.
>>
>>Precisely the point.
>
> Selective quoting again - have you no morals? You should have quoted at
> least "Sadly, most will not before their first post. Happily, most will
> be told about the FAQ in the responses to their first post or to one of
> their early posts." and probably also "They remain newcomers.".
>
> But remember what WSC is said to have said about Americans.
"The Americans will always do the right thing. after they've exhausted all the
alternatives."
Sadly, it is not true in all (most?) cases.
-Lost
Randy Webb
> In comp.lang.javascript message <-8-dnddC8fX...@telcove.net>,
> Sun, 25 Feb 2007 16:28:20, Randy Webb <HikksNo...@aol.com> posted:
>> Dr J R Stockton said the following on 2/25/2007 9:29 AM:
>>> In comp.lang.javascript message <3uadnYSQbr2...@telcove.net>,
>>> Sat, 24 Feb 2007 20:59:24, Randy Webb <HikksNo...@aol.com> posted:
>>>> Dr J R Stockton said the following on 2/24/2007 6:21 PM:
>>>>> In comp.lang.javascript message <Wv-dnYizK7z...@telcove.net>,
>>>>> Sat, 24 Feb 2007 13:32:29, Randy Webb <HikksNo...@aol.com> posted:
>>>>>> What happens in any non-JS language is irrelevant to JS itself.
>>>>> However, it has a considerable influence on what newcomers, few of
>>>>> whom
>>>>> will have started by reading ISO/IEC 16262, are likely to believe.
>>>>> Therefore, it can legitimately influence the contents of the FAQ.
>>>> You are under the impression that newcomers will even know to search
>>>> out the FAQ.
>>> Sadly, most will not before their first post.
>> Precisely the point.
>
> Selective quoting again
Nope, I quoted only what was pertinent to my point.
> - have you no morals?
Are you that anal?
> You should have quoted at least "Sadly, most will not before their first post.
> Happily, most will be told about the FAQ in the responses to their first post
> or to one of their early posts." and probably also "They remain newcomers.".
Thank you for the instructions on what I should or should not quote. I
will continue to quote only what I think is germane to my point, no
matter what you might have to say.
> But remember what WSC is said to have said about Americans.
And remember what Randy said about flying mouse's rear-ends.
Randy Webb
Yep, the FAQ even says that.
> I mean _anyone_ even if you just learned how to insert javascript onto
> HTML page. Actually the latter feedback is especially useful as such
> people are among the FAQ target audience.
Absolutely.
> At the same time it is expected to see on request a basic knowledge of
> clj FAQ history: names of kings, dates and results of main battles,
> current trends etc.
Who fed you that load of crap? And what does something that happened in
1996 have to do with anything that happens in 2007? Unless it has to do
with me telling JRS that I didn't give a flying mouses rear end what he
had to say.
> Ides of November. End of August triumvir. Fights over the future.
> Randy Webb.
> Part 1 <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/browse_frm/
> thread/7c4b17e65bb562dc>
> Part 2 <http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/browse_frm/
> thread/edc1c6099a545e63>
>
>
> Bart Van der Donck is leaving.
Bart Van der Brock.
> Randy Webb is alone.
I am? Wow, me alone on this entire planet, what shall I do with my time
:-) Maybe now that I am alone I can finally get something done with all
the time I will have. Although I doubt I am alone :-)
-Lost
news:k5adnWU5h-V...@telcove.net...
> Dr J R Stockton said the following on 2/26/2007 12:02 PM:
>> In comp.lang.javascript message <-8-dnddC8fX...@telcove.net>
>> But remember what WSC is said to have said about Americans.
>
> And remember what Randy said about flying mouse's rear-ends.
Oh yeah! I totally forgot to respond to your first mouse response.
I have heard of "duck's ass", "rat's ass", but never a "mouse's rear."
Hilarious. Thank you.
-Lost