Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: Sys64738 to Nightfox on Fri Dec 10 2021 08:35:07

Sy> However, the concept of people making up their own commands seems like a
Sy> taking a long walk on a short pier.

If you've written software, you've probably written a function, and in so doing you've made up a command. Your program can call that function whenever it needs to.

In many ways, this is the same thing. It's just that the function (or object, method, property, etc.) is defined at a lower level. Sort of at a layer between the parent application and the child script.

It's not that implementors are altering JS itself. It's that they're giving scripts an interface to resources outside of the JS core so that they can do something with them. Which is the entire point of embedding a scripting engine into your software.

I hope that clarifies it a bit.

---
echicken
electronic chicken bbs - bbs.electronicchicken.com
---
■ Synchronet ■ electronic chicken bbs - bbs.electronicchicken.com

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: Digital Man to Sys64738 on Thu Dec 09 2021 11:57:08

> Because JavaScript was designed without a "console" in mind. Core JavaScript
> makes no assumptions about the I/O capabilities (screen, file, or otherwise)
> of the environment in which the script is running.

I see. So, with Core Javascript is there a standard/universal "print" type option?
SYS64738

---
■ Synchronet ■ TEXNet

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: MRO to Sys64738 on Fri Dec 10 2021 08:52:07

> > This language sounds like a make it up as you go free for all. Sorta
> > like building the bicycle while you ride it. What could go wrong? lol
>
>
> isnt that how computing has always been? that's how engineers do things,
> isn't it?

Don't get me started on engineers. There's a special place in Hades reserved for those people. jk
SYS64738

---
■ Synchronet ■ TEXNet

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: echicken to Sys64738 on Fri Dec 10 2021 15:08:16

> JS is typically used as a scripting environment embedded in some other
> application. The 'parent' application might be written in C or Java for
> example. The parent application might be a BBS, a print accounting system,
> an authentication provider, the firmware on a radio, a web browser, or a
> development platform like node.js. (These are places where I've used JS.)

That makes more sense to me than anything else I have read. Thank-you for that. I guess I was thinking of it more in terms of a stand alone language instead of a scripting enviro. In that case, the parent app contains the terminology used by the script to an extent.

SYS64738

---
■ Synchronet ■ TEXNet

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: echicken to Sys64738 on Fri Dec 10 2021 15:15:51

> If you've written software, you've probably written a function, and in so
> doing you've made up a command. Your program can call that function whenever
> it needs to.

Pardon my dated terms, but I relate "function" in this context to be a "routine" or "subroutine".

> In many ways, this is the same thing. It's just that the function (or
> object, method, property, etc.) is defined at a lower level. Sort of at a
> layer between the parent application and the child script.
>
> It's not that implementors are altering JS itself. It's that they're giving
> scripts an interface to resources outside of the JS core so that they can do
> something with them. Which is the entire point of embedding a scripting
> engine into your software.
>
> I hope that clarifies it a bit.

It certainly does. I appreciate you taking the time to explain it to me. Suddenly, the world starts to make a little more sense.

SYS64738

---
■ Synchronet ■ TEXNet

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: Sys64738 to echicken on Fri Dec 10 2021 09:51:50

Sy> Pardon my dated terms, but I relate "function" in this context to be a
Sy> "routine" or "subroutine".

I haven't used those terms since I was a teenager learning BASIC in high school, but it's all close enough for this discussion.

Sy> It certainly does. I appreciate you taking the time to explain it to me.
Sy> Suddenly, the world starts to make a little more sense.

Glad to hear it. Takes a while for concepts to 'click' sometimes, but once they do, it's a lot easier to proceed with your project. (I usually just dive headfirst into stuff I know nothing about, and come away with slightly, incrementally more understanding each time.)

---
echicken
electronic chicken bbs - bbs.electronicchicken.com
---
■ Synchronet ■ electronic chicken bbs - bbs.electronicchicken.com

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: Sys64738 to Nightfox on Fri Dec 10 2021 08:35 am

>> The console object defined in Synchronet's JS API might have fairly
>> different requirements than for other contexts. When developing JS
>> for a web browser, there is a 'console' object, but that's a totally
>> different thing. The JS console object for Synchronet is for the
>> text-based interface

Sy> I understand what you're saying. Thanks for explaining.

Sy> However, the concept of people making up their own commands seems like a
Sy> taking a long walk on a short pier.

How so?
The ability to create your own functions, your own classes, your own API, etc.
is the foundation of being able to build software. You need to be able to
create your own functions, classes, etc. in order to build software
effectively.

Also, in this case, do you really need to have any consistency between the Synchronet console object and the web console object? What benefit would that serve?

Also I rarely see them referred to as "commands".

Nightfox

---
■ Synchronet ■ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: MRO to Sys64738 on Fri Dec 10 2021 08:52 am

>> This language sounds like a make it up as you go free for all. Sorta
>> like building the bicycle while you ride it. What could go wrong? lol

MR> isnt that how computing has always been? that's how engineers do things,
MR> isn't it?

It's good to think about at least a bit of the design before building it. I doubt computers such as the IBM PC, Mac, etc. were just thrown together haphazardly.

Nightfox

---
■ Synchronet ■ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: echicken to Sys64738 on Fri Dec 10 2021 03:15 pm

> It's not that implementors are altering JS itself. It's that they're giving
> scripts an interface to resources outside of the JS core so that they can do
> something with them. Which is the entire point of embedding a scripting
> engine into your software.

The same can be said of other scripting languages (Perl, Python, Lua, etc.).
--
digital man (rob)

Synchronet/BBS Terminology Definition #85:
UART = Universal Asynchronous Receiver/Transmitter
Norco, CA WX: 53.6°F, 84.0% humidity, 1 mph S wind, 0.03 inches rain/24hrs
---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: Sys64738 to Digital Man on Fri Dec 10 2021 08:36 am

> Re: Javascript for dummies like me
> By: Digital Man to Sys64738 on Thu Dec 09 2021 11:57:08
>
> > Because JavaScript was designed without a "console" in mind. Core
> > JavaScript makes no assumptions about the I/O capabilities (screen, file,
> > or otherwise) of the environment in which the script is running.
>
> I see. So, with Core Javascript is there a standard/universal "print" type
> option?

No, because like I said, Core JavaScript makes no assumptions about the I/O capabilities of the environmnet.
--
digital man (rob)

Synchronet "Real Fact" #104:
The official Synchronet YouTube channel went live on May 6, 2019
Norco, CA WX: 53.6°F, 84.0% humidity, 1 mph S wind, 0.03 inches rain/24hrs
---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: Digital Man to Sys64738 on Fri Dec 10 2021 09:56 am

> Re: Javascript for dummies like me
> By: Sys64738 to Digital Man on Fri Dec 10 2021 08:36 am
>
> > Re: Javascript for dummies like me
> > By: Digital Man to Sys64738 on Thu Dec 09 2021 11:57:08
> >
> > > Because JavaScript was designed without a "console" in mind. Core
> > > JavaScript makes no assumptions about the I/O capabilities (screen,
> > > file, or otherwise) of the environment in which the script is running.
>
> > I see. So, with Core Javascript is there a standard/universal "print"
> > type option?
>
> No, because like I said, Core JavaScript makes no assumptions about the I/O
> capabilities of the environmnet.

And btw, this attribute is not unique to JavaScript. You've heard of the C and C++ programming languages, I'm sure. C and C++, the languages themselves, don't define a standard/universal "print" type function either.

There *are* "Standard Runtime Libraries" for the C and C++ which add that functionality (e.g. puts, printf), but they're not part of the core language definition. I've worked professionally on C projects where there was no "print" type functionality at all (we did not use a "standard runtime library", nor was there a console to print to in the execution environment).
--
digital man (rob)

This Is Spinal Tap quote #8:
Derek Smalls: Making a big thing out of it would have been a good idea.
Norco, CA WX: 53.8°F, 81.0% humidity, 2 mph S wind, 0.03 inches rain/24hrs
---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: Nightfox to MRO on Fri Dec 10 2021 09:24 am

> MR> isnt that how computing has always been? that's how engineers do
> MR> things, isn't it?
>
> It's good to think about at least a bit of the design before building it. I
> doubt computers such as the IBM PC, Mac, etc. were just thrown together
> haphazardly.
>

HAHAHA

guess you haven't seen any.
---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: echicken to Sys64738 on Fri Dec 10 2021 17:20:41

> Sy> Pardon my dated terms, but I relate "function" in this context to be a
> Sy> "routine" or "subroutine".
>
> I haven't used those terms since I was a teenager learning BASIC in high
> school, but it's all close enough for this discussion.

Yep, I'm old. Not to the point where I scram at kids to get off my lawn or anything. However, I do cringe every time I hear "programming" termed as "coding". blech!

> they do, it's a lot easier to proceed with your project. (I usually just
> dive headfirst into stuff I know nothing about, and come away with slightly,
> incrementally more understanding each time.)

Well, that's I'm doing here. The only problem is I wasn't facing the pool before I did my triple somersalt swan dive...lol
SYS64738

---
■ Synchronet ■ TEXNet

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: Sys64738 to echicken on Fri Dec 10 2021 22:35:56

Sy> Yep, I'm old. Not to the point where I scram at kids to get off my lawn or

I'm 40 now and trying to keep up with a 2 year old kid. I feel old enough.

Sy> anything. However, I do cringe every time I hear "programming" termed as
Sy> "coding". blech!

Yeah, there's no 'programming' any more, old timer. There are developers and coders and coders who develop and developers who code and probably a bunch of other things I'm not hip enough to know about.

Exposure therapy is the only thing that really works. Slang comes and goes; you can ignore it or resist it up to a certain point, but language will drift. I am often quite annoyed by stuff like this (eg. referring to the # symbol itself as 'hashtag'), but I eventually get used to it. I just unclench my cringe muscles and move on as many times as it takes until that happens.

---
echicken
electronic chicken bbs - bbs.electronicchicken.com
---
■ Synchronet ■ electronic chicken bbs - bbs.electronicchicken.com

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: echicken to Sys64738 on Sat Dec 11 2021 05:28 am

> Exposure therapy is the only thing that really works. Slang comes and goes;
> you can ignore it or resist it up to a certain point, but language will
> drift. I am often quite annoyed by stuff like this (eg. referring to the #
> symbol itself as 'hashtag'), but I eventually get used to it. I just
> unclench my cringe muscles and move on as many times as it takes until that
> happens.

I like the way you talk... mm hmm.
--
digital man (rob)

This Is Spinal Tap quote #27:
As long as there's, y'know, sex and drugs, I can do without the rock and roll.
Norco, CA WX: 48.1°F, 80.0% humidity, 0 mph S wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: Nightfox to Sys64738 on Fri Dec 10 2021 09:20:33

> Sy> However, the concept of people making up their own commands seems like
> Sy> a taking a long walk on a short pier.
>
> How so?
> The ability to create your own functions, your own classes, your own API,
> etc. is the foundation of being able to build software. You need to be able
> to create your own functions, classes, etc. in order to build software
> effectively.

Never mind me. I was looking at it from the wrong perspective. Echicken set me straight.

> Also I rarely see them referred to as "commands".

What? Is this pick on the old programmer day? lol

SYS64738

---
■ Synchronet ■ TEXNet

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: Digital Man to Sys64738 on Fri Dec 10 2021 09:56:53

> > I see. So, with Core Javascript is there a standard/universal "print"
> > type option?
>
> No, because like I said, Core JavaScript makes no assumptions about the I/O
> capabilities of the environmnet.

Ok. I guess that will make sense as I weed through things.

SYS64738

---
■ Synchronet ■ TEXNet

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: Digital Man to Sys64738 on Fri Dec 10 2021 10:08:53

> And btw, this attribute is not unique to JavaScript. You've heard of the C
> and C++ programming languages, I'm sure. C and C++, the languages
> themselves, don't define a standard/universal "print" type function either.
>
> There *are* "Standard Runtime Libraries" for the C and C++ which add that
> functionality (e.g. puts, printf), but they're not part of the core language
> definition. I've worked professionally on C projects where there was no
> "print" type functionality at all (we did not use a "standard runtime
> library", nor was there a console to print to in the execution environment).

That is odd to me. Even the Eniac and Edvac had the ability to display a readout even if it was on punchcards or some other medieval median.

SYS64738

---
■ Synchronet ■ TEXNet

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: Sys64738 to Digital Man on Fri Dec 10 2021 10:44 pm

> Re: Javascript for dummies like me
> By: Digital Man to Sys64738 on Fri Dec 10 2021 10:08:53
>
> > And btw, this attribute is not unique to JavaScript. You've heard of the
> > C and C++ programming languages, I'm sure. C and C++, the languages
> > themselves, don't define a standard/universal "print" type function
> > either.
>
> > There *are* "Standard Runtime Libraries" for the C and C++ which add that
> > functionality (e.g. puts, printf), but they're not part of the core
> > language definition. I've worked professionally on C projects where there
> > was no "print" type functionality at all (we did not use a "standard
> > runtime library", nor was there a console to print to in the execution
> > environment).
>
> That is odd to me. Even the Eniac and Edvac had the ability to display a
> readout even if it was on punchcards or some other medieval median.

Sure, but the inventors of the language (C) believed in maximum modularity and tried to make the language itself (the built-in "keywords" and symbols) as small as possible. This design has served the world well as C and its derivitives have been to put to great use in environments unlike the one it was first created for (a PDP-7).

The software embedded in your webcam, for example, likely was written in C or C++. It doesn't have "a console" or anywhere to "print", so any logic to support that function would have been a waste of resources on such a device. It's great that such functions are not requirements of the language itself.
--
digital man (rob)

Sling Blade quote #20:
Doyle: Hey is this the kind of retard that drools and rubs shit in his hair?
Norco, CA WX: 49.4°F, 60.0% humidity, 1 mph S wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
---
■ Synchronet ■ Vertrauen ■ Home of Synchronet ■ [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: Sys64738 to Nightfox on Fri Dec 10 2021 10:38 pm

Sy> Never mind me. I was looking at it from the wrong perspective. Echicken
Sy> set me straight.

I think he explained it fairly well.

>> Also I rarely see them referred to as "commands".

Sy> What? Is this pick on the old programmer day? lol

I didn't mean it like that, and sorry it came across that way.

Nightfox

---
■ Synchronet ■ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: echicken to Sys64738 on Sat Dec 11 2021 05:28 am

Sy>> anything. However, I do cringe every time I hear "programming"
Sy>> termed as "coding". blech!

ec> Yeah, there's no 'programming' any more, old timer. There are developers
ec> and coders and coders who develop and developers who code and probably a
ec> bunch of other things I'm not hip enough to know about.

I almost feel like "programming" sounds okay, but the term "computer programmer" seems like something that's not really used anymore. "Software developer" and "software engineer" has largely replaced "computer programmer".

Nightfox

---
■ Synchronet ■ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: echicken to Sys64738 on Sat Dec 11 2021 05:28 am

ec> will drift. I am often quite annoyed by stuff like this (eg. referring to
ec> the # symbol itself as 'hashtag'), but I eventually get used to it. I just

I as well. I also feel annoyed when I see posts where the only text people post with it are #hashtags rather than an actual sentence saying something..

Nightfox

---
■ Synchronet ■ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: Sys64738 to Digital Man on Fri Dec 10 2021 10:44 pm

>> And btw, this attribute is not unique to JavaScript. You've heard of
>> the C and C++ programming languages, I'm sure. C and C++, the
>> languages themselves, don't define a standard/universal "print" type
>> function either.

>> There *are* "Standard Runtime Libraries" for the C and C++ which add
>> that functionality (e.g. puts, printf), but they're not part of the
>> core language definition. I've worked professionally on C projects
>> where there was no "print" type functionality at all (we did not use a
>> "standard runtime
>> library", nor was there a console to print to in the execution environment)

Sy> That is odd to me. Even the Eniac and Edvac had the ability to display a
Sy> readout even if it was on punchcards or some other medieval median.

I think the reasoning is that it's possible to write a program for something that doesn't have a console (such as firmware for a device), where there isn't anything to write onto. The only way to get a message out in that kind of situation would be to send something over a data connection (serial or otherwise).

Nightfox

---
■ Synchronet ■ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: Nightfox to echicken on Sat Dec 11 2021 12:00 am

> Re: Javascript for dummies like me
> By: echicken to Sys64738 on Sat Dec 11 2021 05:28 am
>
> ec> will drift. I am often quite annoyed by stuff like this (eg. referring
> ec> to the # symbol itself as 'hashtag'), but I eventually get used to it.
> ec> I just
>
> I as well. I also feel annoyed when I see posts where the only text people
> post with it are #hashtags rather than an actual sentence saying something..
>

i feel annooyed when they don't call it octothorpe.
---
■ Synchronet ■ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Re: Javascript for dummies like me
By: Digital Man to Sys64738 on Fri Dec 10 2021 22:11:29

> The software embedded in your webcam, for example, likely was written in C
> or C++. It doesn't have "a console" or anywhere to "print", so any logic to
> support that function would have been a waste of resources on such a device.
> It's great that such functions are not requirements of the language itself.

I get that. However, at some point someone won't someone want to run a diagnostic on the device to see a report of what it has done and is currently doing? Without a record, they will only be able to see what the device is doing now and no historical record (no matter how short) for use in troubleshooting.

Of course, it is possible to have a device like this, but I anticipate trouble on the horizon when it comes to rectifying problems the device has.

SYS64738

---
■ Synchronet ■ TEXNet