- Original Message -
From: liorean [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 29/05/06, Andrew Fedoniouk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Axiom:
Code which is not altering the state of the world cannot produce
anything
useful (work) for that world.
(C:) Mine.
How about something like this?
img
On 31/05/06, Andrew Fedoniouk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message -
From: liorean [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From mathematic standpoint:
By its definition Math.random() function is not side effect free
in ECMAScript. It uses static variable for generation of pseudo-number
sequences.
The Mozilla guys propose (in bug 339127) to make the accept= attribute
on input elements also apply to types other than type=file, with the
same meaning as we currently have on textarea. Their particular use case
is to use this as a hook for showing or hiding the spell-check UI.
What do
- Original Message -
From: liorean [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: whatwg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 9:54 AM
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Side effects free scripts
| On 31/05/06, Andrew Fedoniouk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| - Original Message -
| From: liorean [EMAIL
On Wednesday 2006-05-31 19:51 +, Ian Hickson wrote:
The Mozilla guys propose (in bug 339127) to make the accept= attribute
on input elements also apply to types other than type=file, with the
same meaning as we currently have on textarea. Their particular use case
is to use this as a
L. David Baron wrote:
We might want to use the accept attribute in the future to indicate what
types of content can be sent, and thus what types of input the user
agent should allow. Overloading that to get a boolean for whether
spellchecking should be enabled seems broken.
AIUI, the accept
On Thursday 2006-06-01 00:41 +, Ian Hickson wrote:
Well, we want to avoid adding attributes for each feature (spellcheck=on
autoindent=on syntaxhighlight=on syntaxcheck=off, as browsers add each
feature) -- instead it is better, IMHO at least, to let the UA determine
how it should
On Thu, 01 Jun 2006 05:43:42 +0700, Andrew Fedoniouk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know any algorithm of random number generation which is not
using previous value stored somewhere (seed). (I mean software based
random generation only)
There are software random number generators which
- Original Message -
From: Alexey Feldgendler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [whatwg] Side effects free scripts
On Thu, 01 Jun 2006 05:43:42 +0700, Andrew Fedoniouk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't know any algorithm of random number generation which is not
- Original Message -
From: liorean [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[skiped]
The problem is that verifying whether function may result in side
effects is a pain that must be delayed until runtime. You cannot know
that methods, functions or constructors are side effect free unless
they are host
10 matches
Mail list logo