that a much more appropriate term for `this` would be
the "receiver" (a smalltalk-ism, afaict), or the "receiving
object" (if it were not because in ES5 strict it may not be an
object), or , but *not* "context", please. The "context" is
another !==
On Feb 26, 12:39 pm, And Clover wrote:
>
> Nope: Array.prototype.* are only defined to work generically for native
> JS objects, not host objects.
Note that nowadays 99.99% of the times host objects are native, both
in browsers and in ssjs, except in Microsoft's products.
--
Jorg
On Feb 7, 3:56 am, Jorge wrote:
> On Feb 7, 3:34 am, Miller Medeiros wrote:
>
> > this code here:http://pastebin.com/KAbQKDJN(postedby rmurphey a couple
> > weeks ago) - doesn't work all the times inside a webview.. but I haven't
> > seen it fail inside t
t;leaks", you should ignore him too. Because these are bugs exclusive
of IEs. As 99.99% of the bugs of .innerHTML.
--
Jorge.
--
To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list:
http://www.mail-archive.com/jsmentors@jsmentors.com/
To search via a non-Google archive, vis
ggy" table.
> and my test showed Chrome auto inserted them while Safari did not,
> and Safari bugged on colgroup.
What exactly did your safari do wrong wrt the colgroup ?
--
Jorge.
--
To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list:
http://www.mail-archive.com/jsm
On Feb 7, 3:34 am, Miller Medeiros wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 8:10 PM, Jorge wrote:
> > On Feb 7, 1:02 am, Miller Medeiros wrote:
>
> > > my app should also run inside a WebView
>
> > In any case. Mobile Safari is a webview too.
>
> in theory they are th
On Feb 7, 3:15 am, Diego Perini wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 3:02 AM, Jorge wrote:
>
> > navigator.userAgent
> > "Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_6; en-us) AppleWebKit/
> > 534.19+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.3 Safari/533.19.4"
>
> &q
On Feb 7, 3:14 am, jdalton wrote:
> @Jorge We have given you tests, plz troll elsewhere.
You've given a test, in singular, which is not the same as test*s*, in
plural, and what it shows is a table created with a tbody, that can
hardly be considered a bug, when tables have been being
On Feb 7, 2:26 am, Diego Perini wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Jorge wrote:
> > On Feb 7, 12:35 am, jdalton wrote:
> >> @Jorge:
>
> >> Shows Chrome 11 and Safari 5 failing at least 1 of the tests:
> >> http://jsbin.com/ipowa4
>
> > I
On Feb 7, 2:18 am, Diego Perini wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 1:17 AM, Jorge wrote:
> > On Feb 7, 12:46 am, Diego Perini wrote:
>
> >> Those were the bugs I found advice for here:
>
> >> http://webbugtrack.blogspot.com/2009/08/bug-179-innerhtml-love-
builds the page from the .html. In other
words, if you can't trust it, you can't trust anything in the page.
> thanks for all the answers so far, I didn't knew about some of the bugs
> (never tried to use innerHTML outside the body tag).
Nor tried to insert another
On Feb 7, 12:35 am, jdalton wrote:
> @Jorge:
>
> Shows Chrome 11 and Safari 5 failing at least 1 of the tests:
> http://jsbin.com/ipowa4
It's quite debatable whether it's a bug to create a table with a
tbody...
> > LOL, March, 7, 2007 ? That must have been Safa
Surely, if you dig enough in the bugtrackers, you're going to find
bugs in some DOM methods too, are you going to "advice" against using
them too ?
> I haven't tested all these bugs myself on all platforms and Webkit
> versions but I must believe to those, at least tho
On Feb 6, 9:24 pm, Jorge wrote:
> And innerHTML is no more any faster than DOM methods, at least not in
> webkits:http://jsperf.com/dom-methods-vs-innerhtml
s/any faster/much faster/g
--
Jorge.
--
To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list:
http://ww
On Feb 6, 11:57 pm, Diego Perini wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 7:54 PM, Jorge wrote:
>
> > innerHTML known problems ? In Chrome/Safari ? No. Sorry but no, sorry.
> > Perhaps in IEs...
>
> I didn't specify which browsers are affected by ".innerHTML"
On Feb 6, 11:57 pm, Diego Perini wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 7:54 PM, Jorge wrote:
> > On Feb 6, 4:25 pm, Diego Perini wrote:
>
> >> By creating elements using DOM methods you are doing it correctly. If
> >> you can completely avoid using ".innerHTML&
On Feb 6, 11:55 pm, jdalton wrote:
> > That url gives me "Sorry, no posts matched your criteria."
>
> Remove the trailing `-` from the url.http://bit.ly/eDSgvi
LOL, March, 7, 2007 ? That must have been Safari 2.x :-))) Are you
kidding ?
--
Jorge.
--
To view archive
node references and rewrites the element's
> contents from scratch.
Of course. That's what innerHTML does.
--
Jorge.
--
To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list:
http://www.mail-archive.com/jsmentors@jsmentors.com/
To search via a non-Google archive, visi
a couple weeks
> ago:http://twitter.com/rmurphey/status/27914215951962112- and it seems that
> the
> problem occur even without setting the `location.hash`..
That's Phonegap in a webview in a native app...
--
Jorge.
--
To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors M
On Feb 6, 9:16 pm, Asen Bozhilov wrote:
>
> The problem is that, while we are non commercial organization, we are
> not able to give money prize to winner.
No need to give money, just give and iPad :-)
--
Jorge.
--
To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman li
And innerHTML is no more any faster than DOM methods, at least not in
webkits: http://jsperf.com/dom-methods-vs-innerhtml
--
Jorge.
--
To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list:
http://www.mail-archive.com/jsmentors@jsmentors.com/
To search via a non-Google archive
On Feb 6, 8:23 pm, Miller Medeiros wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 1:54 PM, Jorge wrote:
> > On Feb 6, 4:25 pm, Diego Perini wrote:
>
> > > By creating elements using DOM methods you are doing it correctly. If
> > > you can completely avoid using ".innerHTML&q
n - but let's not start a "my editor is
> better" post).
>
> Is a debugger still too much to ask for currently? should I simply log stuff
> to the console?
npm install node-inspector gives you the same (gorgeous) debugger
that's in Chrome/Safari. See: http://www.yout
o. Sorry but no, sorry.
Perhaps in IEs...
--
Jorge.
--
To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list:
http://www.mail-archive.com/jsmentors@jsmentors.com/
To search via a non-Google archive, visit here:
http://www.mail-archive.com/jsmentors@googlegroups.com/
To unsubscribe
On Jan 19, 3:22 pm, Balázs Galambosi wrote:
> 2011/1/19 Jorge :
>
> > I sometimes just don't declare them with var but as parameters:
>
> > function (x) {
> > var a,b;
> > ...
> > }
>
> > function (x, a, b) { ... }
>
> That is an aw
d.
I sometimes just don't declare them with var but as parameters:
function (x) {
var a,b;
...
}
function (x, a, b) { ... }
--
Jorge.
--
To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list:
http://www.mail-archive.com/jsmentors@jsmentors.com/
To search via a non-G
On Jan 15, 9:49 pm, Rey Bango wrote:
> (...)
> Many of the same top-level developers that frequent C.L.JS can be found here
And in-my-humble-opinion some of the worse who poisoned cljs, too. So
beware.
> offering fantastic advice. (...)
at times, literally fantastic :-/
--
Jorge.
--
In short, the MTDs are either
4 or 10 ms, and only Opera allows timeouts of 1ms but not of 0ms.
--
Jorge.
--
To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list:
http://www.mail-archive.com/jsmentors@jsmentors.com/
To search via a non-Google archive, visit here:
http://www.m
gt;
> })()
To really mimic setInterval you've got to put the setTimeout at the
very beginning of foo, before the alert.
(function foo(){
setTimeout(foo, 1);
alert('I will get called on page load and after 10 seconds again and
again without setInterval :)');
})()
--
Jo
nctionality a lot easier than
> with option A. Does anyone have advice or common pitfalls when taking
> approach B? I appreciate any input.
>
Perhaps, if that's a *method*, you should not be passing any
parameters... :-)
poligon.points= ...;
poligon.options= ...;
poligon.draw();
--
On Jan 12, 4:06 pm, Peter van der Zee wrote:
> For a detailed concrete parse tree see:
>
> http://esparser.qfox.nl/#runnow:on,code:void-0
>
> (hover mouse to see name of each node)
Awesome!
--
Jorge.
--
To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list:
t;moar";
> ... return[some,array];
> etc.
>
> (I'm still in favor of adding the space! But in terms of the spec, the space
> is only required to make a distinction.)
void-0
-> undefined
--
Jorge.
--
To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman lis
32 matches
Mail list logo
