Re: Switch() Statement Not Working

On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 21:44:56 +0100, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

Sean Inglis wrote:

On Sun, 05 Feb 2006 19:20:40 +0100, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
me wrote:
Others have commented on a few of the misinterpretations in the code.
All logical guesses, but not close enough :)
You are talking nonsense.

Perhaps I should clear something up right off the bat; the "not close
enough" remark was made in response to the guesses made in the OPs
original code, not the subsequent responses, most of which hit the nail on
the head.

ACK

Perhaps this acknowledgement puts you in a better temper?

It is not my temper that is the matter here. But JFYI, as you are so
concerned with my health, I have been quite calm when I was writing that
and I am now.

The best advice I can give anyone using JS is to go for the excellent
O'Reilly reference:

http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/jscript4/index.html
This is recommended in the FAQ only because all other books are worse.

So you acknowledge that, even by your demanding standards, it *is* the
best reference available? Or have I misunderstood?

(apologies for harking back to this - missed it first time)


Who's FAQ?

The FAQ of this newsgroup.

Why should I care?

Because you are not a fool?

And in any case, why does this have relevance?

Because it is the FAQ of _this_ newsgroup, written by and contributed to by
its accepted regulars, people whose knowledge about and understanding of
the subjects discussed probably exceeds yours by orders of magnitude?

You have no way of knowing what my level of understanding is. In
any case, a phrase such as "accepted regulars" is, to use one of your
favourite words "nonsense" when applied to a public, unmoderated forum.

You gain no special privileges due to the frequency (or pomposity) of your
posts.


I recommend it to the OP from my personal experience (and the
^^^^^^^
response of others I recommend it to).
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Pardon?



I recommend the book to other people. After they have bought the book and
digested its contents, they have a similarly high opinion.


Is your own personal experience of this book different?

Unfortunately, it is. Enough bad examples from it have been posted
here.


But have you *read* it? Every book may have errors or omissions.


and you could do worse than have the DHTML reference to had as well:

http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/dhtmlref2/index.html
You could do worse, but this is bad enough. A book published four
years ago is certainly obsolete. The examples in the example chapter
prove that.

Ah, so you haven't read that one *either*?

Of course not. Why should I read or even buy a book that is obviously
obsolete and uses so many bad examples in just one chapter? Would you?



I did. Twice. There are trade-offs of course when a book is so old. I find
that its advantages far outweigh its drawbacks.


Once again, I am aware of the age of the book, and have had a steady
supply of others to compare it to. It is still without peer if you want
to *grok* DHTML/JS in a platform neutral manner, rather than firefight
a problem or hack something together.

That there is nothing better (which I seriously doubt) does not make it
any good.


And it does not disqualify it from being excellent for its intended
audience and purpose.

If there is something better, recommend it.


Superb references if you want more than a lightweight quick-and-dirty
understanding of each.
Wrong.

LOL, on what basis do you make *that* assertion, exactly?

Personal experience, including experience of postings in this newsgroup
of much higher quality.


Personal experience of *those* books? If you only have second
hand reports, or snippets of information posted here, how do you consider
that you have enough information to form an opinion?

Just about every question asked on here could be answered by referring the
OP to the language spec. or RFC, or some other "definitive" reference.
Chances are this will be of no use to the OP, as it will lack the context
to allow the information to be used in a timely way.

I await with interest your DHTML/XHTML/JS reference books. If they are as
good as you claim they are, I'll be happy to buy them and recommend them
to others. Until then...

BTW: Are you Kamal Sharma of Nugen.net, owner of mememe.com, or do you
have his explicit permission to use his second-level domain? If not,
you better stop this domain abuse at once.

You've Googled!

I have not, whois(1) sufficed. For some of us, the Internet is more
than the Web.


Pomposity simply doesn't do you justice. I use "Googled" in a colloquial
sense to describing a number of online search methods, cf. use of "Hoover"

For some of us, the language is more than the dictionary.


How sweet.

I am glad I could amuse you. You are easily impressed, yes?


Not usually. But impressed != amused. I'm more easily amused than
impressed.

But it's a fair point, I keep forgetting to reset my profile.

I'd much prefer to use my real name to tell you to piss off, should it
come to that.

I am sorry to say that your vocabulary does not form a non-empty
intersecting set with mine. [psf 2.13]


I can run up a few definitions if you like? But now that I have
a grip on your posting style, I don't think it will do either of us any
good.

I do not care much about your real name, at least not in this
NetNews
top-level hierarchy. I care about (misguided) network abuse, and you
should care about that, too.


Yes, fair point.

Happy now?

That was never the point. However, your From header is still not
acceptable as there is no .house top-level domain (yet). See also
<URL:http://giganews.com/legal/aup.html>

Don't worry; when the .house TLD becomes available, I'll be sure to
register it. Until then, I will remain resolutely unacceptable.



HTH

PointedEars

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: C-FAQ 19.7
    ... post a reference to anything that exists only on Usenet. ... The FAQ is routinely posted as a single article. ... little surprised by a newsgroup FAQ that specifically avoids any ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: How do I make an Image visible?
    ... required until the FAQ maintainer eventually removes the recommendation from ... The document.layers branch was removed but the document.all branch was left at the behest of John Stockton because, at the time, he was still using IE4 and complained about the "people of the world who couldn't upgrade" (for whatever reason). ... be an instrument to save regulars' free time and allow them to answer only the interesting questions, you only misuse the authority that you have been given to keep the status quo as much as you can, as bad as that is. ... The fact that the book is in the FAQ at all is directly because it is the "least bad book" and it has been discussed, at length, that the FAQ should at least recommend *some* book, even it is the least bad book. ...
    (comp.lang.javascript)
  • RE: Asdk the Wizard ?
    ... volume of URLs into the FAQ. ... Goto Specific OpenVMS Ask The Wizard Entry Number ... Topic citations here refer to the unique and parenthesized number ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • Re: Comments, suggestions on comp.lang.javascript FAQ
    ... Please recommend which you feel are most valuable. ... Google results for my Web site indicated that at least some of the following are useful: ... The current FAQ maintainer's name seems appropriate. ... include the recommended number of maximum lines in the instructions. ...
    (comp.lang.javascript)
  • Re: K&R3?
    ... >>Can anyone recommend any other good printed reference material? ... It covers C99, C89, ... A Modern Approach is a highly regarded textbook, ...
    (comp.lang.c)
Loading