JTF: Javascript Unit Testing Farm

[acemtp]

Hello,

I would like to show you a new collaborative website for javascript
programmer.

It's quite hard to know if some specific code you wrote will work on
all browsers, and if not, why it doesn't work. You often have to
install lot of browsers on your computer, buy a mac or a pc, and make
unit tests.

On JTF (Javascript Unit Testing Farm), you can write javascript unit
tests that will be executed on all browsers, automatically. You'll be
able to post comment, rate scripts and, of course, you'll be able to
reuse, modify and increase the compatibility of current scripts.

I hope you'll like and you'll find this site useful.

http://jtf.ploki.info

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

ti**@hotmail.co .uk wrote:

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

ti**@hotmail.co .uk wrote:

> Heres some quotes from "the lead program manager for the web platform
> in IE"
YMMD.

> The developers of IE disagree with your idiotic statements in details

The developers of IE say much. They also said XMLHttpRequest would be a
native object in IE 7.

Looks like they kept their word this time klingonboy

It's Vulcan, not Klingon. Do you know anything at all?
http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2006/01/23/516393.aspx
It has already been proven here that XMLHttpRequest( ) will _not_ be a native
object, i.e. provided by the new JScript language version, with IE 7. It
does not run with the WSH, for example, only in IE. That makes it a _host_
object.
[snipped more whining]

PointedEars

[John G Harris]

In article <ad************ **@objmedia.dem on.co.uk>, Stephen Kellett
<sn***@objmedia .demon.co.uk> writes

<snip>

but that is just an evolution of the original insight that gave rise to
the Sony Walkman (the first portable music player).

<snip>

Not so original :-)

Before the Walkman there was the barrel organ. Before that there was the
penny whistle. Before that there were the Pan pipes. ...

Bagpipes are also portable but some people claim they are weapons, not
music makers.

John
--
John Harris

[John G Harris]

In article <11************ **********@i40g 2000cwc.googleg roups.com>,
ti**@hotmail.co .uk writes

Go to www.electrician.com to see the monster this experienced designer
(10000 pages) has created. You may be pleased to hear that website
almost the same in Firefox as it does in IE, unfortunately its
disgusting in both.

<snip>

It produces a stack overflow when viewed off line. Something new every
day.

I don't understand why people who say IE6-only put this in their code :

<!-- Hide script from old browsers

John
--
John Harris

[John W. Kennedy]

bg*****@gmail.c om wrote:

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

If Bill Gates thought like you, he would still be working out of a
garage. It is all about marketing.

Bill Gates never worked out of a garage. In fact, he built his company
on standards compliance.

You are a sick, lying troll, and a waste of evolution.

*PLONK*

--
John W. Kennedy
"But now is a new thing which is very old--
that the rich make themselves richer and not poorer,
which is the true Gospel, for the poor's sake."
-- Charles Williams. "Judgement at Chelmsford"

[bgulian]

Randy Webb wrote:

bg*****@gmail.c om said the following on 4/1/2006 10:58 AM:

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

In fact, he built his company on standards compliance.
Now that is plain ludicrous. Unless the "standards" you are referring to
are/were his own personal standards.

Not really. DOS (mostly acquired, not created from scratch) was made
to conform to IBM's PC hardware standard, cpu, bus protocol etc.

Now the other guys, Jobs and Wozniak, they actualy did work out of
a garage and established their own standard.

And so did Bill Gates.

Jobs and Wozniak did invent their own hardware protocol, asynchronous
bus, 68000 cpu, interrrupt vector handling and OS (from scratch), i.e.
innovatiion. Gates and innovation have rarely, if ever, occupied the
same room. Microsoft Word is the sole, built from the ground up,
groundbreaking application that MS has produced. Maybe Vista will be
the second. Your guess is as good as mine.

I think they have 5% of the worldwide personal computer market now,
probably less in the US. Although I admire what they did far more than
what Gates did, I have to admit that they "lost".

If they lost, why does Gates own part of that "loser company"?

Where have you been? Gate's monetary contributions to Apple has been
widely acknowledged as a "down boy" payoff to settle Apple's copyright
suit. And if he received stock in return (this is news to me) then I
certainly hope it's not a controlling interest because, aside from
Word, Microsoft's gifts to Apple have been trojan horses, purposely
crippled and lacking features found on Windows.

Having said that, the company I work for only tests with IE and tells
their users upfront to turn back if they are using another browser.
It makes me very nervous to develop for them, especially in their
reliance on Active X.
Why? If a corporation wants to shoot themselves in the foot then let
them. Hell, load the gun for them.

I wouldn't work for a company unless I admired their software. And I
do admire my company's software. I just wish they would move away from
MS centric development. I don't want to get labeled as a dangerous Mac
fanatic LAMP head though so I pick my battles.

And that is why 99% of Windows users use IE as the default browser. It's
free, it was there, they had no reason to go download another.

Absolutely true. I've been working with three just-out-of-college
teachers on a non-profit site (www.ghanawisdom.org). I told them they
had to test their pages on Firefox and all three of them said "What's
Firefox?". They know now.

IE 7 moves so close to the W3c standard that you ought to be more
concerned about whether your pages conform.

<sarcasm>
Oh? My copy handles XHMTL so close to the W3C standards that I thought I
was using Mozilla for a moment
</sarcasm>

Well okay, maybe not that close. The engineers state they are moving
closer anyway. My copy has a gigantic resource or memory hole in it.
MS does sometimes make gigantic changes between beta and fc though.
Bob Gulian

[Randy Webb]

bg*****@gmail.c om said the following on 4/3/2006 9:56 AM:

Randy Webb wrote:

bg*****@gmail.c om said the following on 4/1/2006 10:58 AM:

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

In fact, he built his company on standards compliance. Now that is plain ludicrous. Unless the "standards" you are referring to
are/were his own personal standards.

Not really. DOS (mostly acquired, not created from scratch) was made
to conform to IBM's PC hardware standard, cpu, bus protocol etc.

True. But it was Bill Gate's "Standards of Business Practice" that he
created of his own. The cut-throat style that he introduced was of his
own making and very rarely seen prior to that. Now, it is emulated
widely (or tried to be emulated).

Now the other guys, Jobs and Wozniak, they actualy did work out of
a garage and established their own standard. And so did Bill Gates.

Jobs and Wozniak did invent their own hardware protocol, asynchronous
bus, 68000 cpu, interrrupt vector handling and OS (from scratch), i.e.
innovatiion. Gates and innovation have rarely, if ever, occupied the
same room. Microsoft Word is the sole, built from the ground up,
groundbreaking application that MS has produced. Maybe Vista will be
the second. Your guess is as good as mine.

I hope not. About the only decent products MS has produced (if any) were
gotten from elsewhere.

I think they have 5% of the worldwide personal computer market now,
probably less in the US. Although I admire what they did far more than
what Gates did, I have to admit that they "lost".

If they lost, why does Gates own part of that "loser company"?

Where have you been? Gate's monetary contributions to Apple has been
widely acknowledged as a "down boy" payoff to settle Apple's copyright
suit. And if he received stock in return (this is news to me)

I am not sure if it is MS proper or Bill Gates that owns the stock but
Apple stock is owned by either MS or Bill Gates directly. It was played
off as a "wise investment" to keep from admitting the "down boy" aspect
of it.
then I certainly hope it's not a controlling interest because, aside from
Word, Microsoft's gifts to Apple have been trojan horses, purposely
crippled and lacking features found on Windows.
No, it is nowhere near controlling. About 5% or so if memory serves me.

Having said that, the company I work for only tests with IE and tells
their users upfront to turn back if they are using another browser.
It makes me very nervous to develop for them, especially in their
reliance on Active X.

Why? If a corporation wants to shoot themselves in the foot then let
them. Hell, load the gun for them.

I wouldn't work for a company unless I admired their software. And I
do admire my company's software. I just wish they would move away from
MS centric development. I don't want to get labeled as a dangerous Mac
fanatic LAMP head though so I pick my battles.

Totally understandable.

And that is why 99% of Windows users use IE as the default browser. It's
free, it was there, they had no reason to go download another.
Absolutely true. I've been working with three just-out-of-college
teachers on a non-profit site (www.ghanawisdom.org). I told them they
had to test their pages on Firefox and all three of them said "What's
Firefox?". They know now.

I had a conversation very similar to that not long ago but the person I
was talking to wasn't just out of college teachers. It was a College
Professor. His teaching? Web Programming. Go figure.

IE 7 moves so close to the W3c standard that you ought to be more
concerned about whether your pages conform.

<sarcasm>
Oh? My copy handles XHMTL so close to the W3C standards that I thought I
was using Mozilla for a moment
</sarcasm>

Well okay, maybe not that close.

<G> The engineers state they are moving closer anyway.
Haven't they always claimed that though? Even with IE5.0 and 5.5 they
claimed they were "moving closer". The problem is, MS thinks a tenth of
an inch a year to get from the Earth to the Sun is "moving closer". It
is, but not very fast. Becoming totally "Standards Compliant" is not in
MS' best financial interest.
My copy has a gigantic resource or memory hole in it.
The whole thing is a "resource or memory hole" :)
MS does sometimes make gigantic changes between beta and fc though.

That is very true and I hope they do with IE7. But until MSIE's market
share drops to between 60 and 70 percent you won't see much out of them.
It is still the dominant browser and as long as it stays there you won't
see innovation/standards in it. When it drops to 60-70 where the
dominance is threatened then you will see dramatic changes and second
Browser War. Why? Bill Gates couldn't give a crap whether they produce a
good product or not - as long as the product they have is dominant. Its
about market domination and not about customer satisfaction.

--
Randy
comp.lang.javas cript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq & newsgroup weekly
Javascript Best Practices - http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/