How do you stop a javascript program?

[electrician]

While running a program that exceeds the array limits it issues an
alert. I want to then stop the program after filling in the output
boxes with blanks. How do you stop the program?
I have worked on this for days and tried searching the net, but have
found nothing.

[Evertjan.]

wrote on 05 mrt 2006 in comp.lang.javas cript:

Perhaps you have learned something from my experience. Let's hope so.
Too many nit pickers are not familiar with real world experiences. I
am a hard knots laborer, electrician, with a degree in Mathematics that
applies production lessons from real work in the electrical trade to
programming. Something that I think is unique and beneficial to
academia types.

The academia types should be grateful.

But, who are you talking to?

Please quote what you are replying to.

If you want to post a followup via groups.google.c om, don't use the
"Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on "show options" at the
top of the article, then click on the "Reply" at the bottom of the article
headers. <http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsrep ly/>

--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

[Zif]

el*********@ele ctrician.com wrote:

I don't really try to meet the W3.org standards. 98 per cent of the
visitors to my site use IE5.0+.
Your decision to use proprietary, largely undocumented 'standards' is a
significant part of the cause of you maintenance problems.

I stopped trying to be compatible with
Netscape, Opera, and Firefox long ago.
That becomes self-fulfilling. If your site doesn't work with those
browsers, then people who use them will stop visiting your site.

I used to spend about 30 per
cent of my time on compatibility issues, but now have the attitude that
if the other browsers can't meet MS standards, then too bad. MS is
more of a standard setter than W3.org.
Your compatibility issues are most likely *because* you use MS as a
'standard'. Using W3C standards, in most cases, reduces
incompatibility . Microsoft is a contributor to and supporter of the W3C
standards you deride.

Also, most users of my site
have high speed connections so I don't worry about large file sizes. I
have one popular calculator that is 85k right in the web page and I
have not had one single complaint in six years. Besides, js files are
too hard to edit!
Your difficulty with editing the files is a direct result of them being
poorly written and your failure to follow even basic design principles,
much less standards.

I suppose I am not in line with academia, but then
I taught myself what I know, and speak from experience. I use
JavaScript because of the ease of use, but more than that, for the
portability. Write it, upload it, and it is available. And as far as
compact code like you suggest, I don't worry about that either. Let
the machines hum and do all the work, they are made for it.
So I am a sloppy programmer, but my site makes money. I would get an F
in your class, but I am not worried about grades any more either. Next
month I start drawing social security.

I'll presume that is because of your age rather than employability -
good for you.

A review of your code shows that there will be many maintenance issues
because of the poor structure of the code, complete disregard for basic
design principles and standards.

Do your qualifications as an electrician also qualify you to write
thousands of lines of production code and publish it as a public
resource with complete disregard for basic design principles and standards?

I'll bet you don't even know if your calculator will provide the correct
result in all cases - how did you test it? Do you have any
understanding of how to test it? If someone uses your calculator and
gets the wrong answer that subsequently causes damage to people or
property, what responsibility are you going to take for that? Do you
have professional indemnity insurance for the programs you write and
publish on the web?

You don't even mention on your site that your calculator will not work
for some browsers - your attitude is beyond irresponsible, it is negligent.
--
Zif

[RobG]

el*********@ele ctrician.com wrote:

Perhaps you have learned something from my experience.
Here's something you can learn from my experience with your code.

You make frequent use of the following function to check number entry
(incidentally, obfuscation makes maintenance even harder for you):

function e(U){
var T = true;
var i = 0;
var aD = U.length;
var ch;
while (i<aD){
ch = U.substring(i, i+1);
if ( ( (ch<"0") || (ch>"9") ) && (ch!=".") ){
alert("Invalid Entry");
T = false;
break;
}
i++;
}
return T;
}
In your 'Continuous Load' field, enter 1.1.1 and your program simply
dies without any error message.

How can this be harmful? Calculate the voltage drop for a conductor and
enter say 50 for the distance from supply (I got zero). Change that to
5000.0. and calculate the value again - guess what? No change to the
voltage drop, yet deleting the last '.' shows a drop of 2.9 (in my case)
- yet a user could happily print out your recommendation from the
previous entry without being told your program screwed up.
10 years in development, 10 minutes to find a bug.
Try putting 50,000 in the field - again, no error message but I'm given
a voltage drop of zero (which I'll guess is erroneous). So even when
you do detect an erroneous entry, you deal with it by giving a totally
wrong answer.

Guess you're just passing on a lesson from the school of hard knocks, right?

Let's hope so.
I hope you did.

Too many nit pickers are not familiar with real world experiences. I
am a hard knots laborer, electrician, with a degree in Mathematics that
applies production lessons from real work in the electrical trade to
programming. Something that I think is unique and beneficial to
academia types.

Too many idiots think that if it 'works' for a limited set of
circumstances it must be OK.

Maybe those academic types really do know something after all.

--
Rob

[Gérard Talbot]

el*********@ele ctrician.com wrote :

I don't really try to meet the W3.org standards.
99.99% of all electrical appliances on this planet meet either a
national standard/specification or an international
standard/specification. Same thing with electricity traveling across
borders, across countries. Wires implement industry or army standards.
98 per cent of the
visitors to my site use IE5.0+.

Maybe it's because they don't have any other choice. Netscape 7.x, Opera
7+, Firefox 1.x, Safari 1+ and Icab all have the ability to "disguise"
themselves as IE 6. They can change the user agent string which
identifies them as a browser and browser version when visiting a site.
I stopped trying to be compatible with
Netscape, Opera, and Firefox long ago. I used to spend about 30 per
cent of my time on compatibility issues,
Maybe, at that point, it would have been back then useful to visit a
newsgroup like this one to seek help, assistance. The good thing about
W3C web standards is that most of these are supported by Internet
Explorer 6.
DHTML and DOM objects are different issues and not covered by W3C web
standards but then there are more and more convergence and agreements
than divergences.
but now have the attitude that
if the other browsers can't meet MS standards, then too bad.

Your attitude makes your website less accessible, not more accessible to
other browsers, to other platforms, to other web-aware applications, to
other media, etc...
MS is
more of a standard setter than W3.org.
You would not say that if 90% of your visitors were among Safari,
Firefox, Netscape 7.x, Icab users.
Also, most users of my site
have high speed connections so I don't worry about large file sizes.
You have a complacent attitude here. Visitors having problems with your
site (IE-specific or too big or whatever) will not come back:
realistically speaking, what else would you expect them to do?
I
have one popular calculator that is 85k right in the web page and I
have not had one single complaint in six years.

If any of your visitor could read your posts in this thread, then they
would have a confirmation of how useless, pointless writing you a
complaint would have been.

Besides, js files are
too hard to edit!
With an "Homer Simpson" attitude, yes. With an "Lisa Simpson" attitude,
anyone can learn ... by seeking useful assistance in newsgroup such as
this one.
I suppose I am not in line with academia, but then
I taught myself what I know, and speak from experience. I use
JavaScript because of the ease of use, but more than that, for the
portability. Write it, upload it, and it is available. And as far as
compact code like you suggest, I don't worry about that either. Let
the machines hum and do all the work, they are made for it.
A webpage should never assume that the users visiting a site has endless
system resources (CPU, RAM, high-speed connection). There are lots of
web-aware devices and applications which have modest system resources.
Accessibility laws are more and more recognizing this fact.
So I am a sloppy programmer, but my site makes money. I would get an F
in your class, but I am not worried about grades any more either. Next
month I start drawing social security.

Users/Visitors of a site (not us) always have the final word and they
are the ones who can force a site to file a bankrupcy form. That has
been the case during the dot-boom era (1999-2001) on the web.

Gérard
--
remove blah to email me

[Gérard Talbot]

el*********@ele ctrician.com wrote :

Perhaps you have learned something from my experience. Let's hope so.
Too many nit pickers
Just forget about Thomas Lahn: most of regular posters and experienced
scripters in here don't like his attitude and harsch habits.
are not familiar with real world experiences.
I remember one company doing wires not meeting wire standards and they
were selling those wires for cheap. After a few fires that burn whole
houses, they were discovered.
I
am a hard knots laborer, electrician, with a degree in Mathematics that
applies production lessons from real work in the electrical trade to
programming. Something that I think is unique and beneficial to
academia types.

Your opinion does not make sense and is not realistic even in the field
of maths and electricity to begin with.

Gérard
--
remove blah to email me