Server-side JavaScript

[Jamiil]

I have been reading a book on JavaScript that is mostly for the
client-side, however, I'd like to learn the language from the
server-side, is there a book anyone could recomend?
TIA

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Jamiil wrote:

I have been reading a book on JavaScript that is mostly for the
client-side, however, I'd like to learn the language from the
server-side, is there a book anyone could recomend?

Not a book.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JavaScript#Reference_Material>

But probably you are talking about server-side _JScript_ as used in MS
ASP(.NET). In that case you would be confusing language and execution
environment.

<URL:http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/jscript7/html/jslrfjscriptlanguagereference.asp>
<URL:http://msdn.microsoft.com/asp.net/>
PointedEars

[Ian Collins]

Jamiil wrote:

I have been reading a book on JavaScript that is mostly for the
client-side, however, I'd like to learn the language from the
server-side, is there a book anyone could recomend?
TIA

Google?

Your choices will be somewhat limited and there are better choices for
server side processing.

--
Ian Collins.

[Julian Turner]

Jamiil wrote:

I have been reading a book on JavaScript that is mostly for the
client-side, however, I'd like to learn the language from the
server-side, is there a book anyone could recomend?
TIA From my own knowledge, JScript (MS implementation of ECMA script) for

ASP server side is identical to JScript in the browser (although the
Sun One implementation of JScript in its Chilisoft ASP software has
some bugs).

The additional things you need to learn about are not JScript as such,
but the host objects (Application, Session, etc) provided by the ASP
environment, and general ASP scripting techniques (common to whatever
language you use for ASP). Look for books relating to ASP, or ask in
an ASP newsgroup.

Regards

Julian Turner

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Julian Turner wrote:

Jamiil wrote:

I have been reading a book on JavaScript that is mostly for the
client-side, however, I'd like to learn the language from the
server-side, is there a book anyone could recomend?
TIA

From my own knowledge, JScript (MS implementation of ECMA script) for
ASP server side is identical to JScript in the browser [...]

I would consider this to be wrong, because server-side JScript.NET is there,
as an implementation of the _ECMAScript_ Edition 4 proposal, while AFAIK it
has not spread yet to a client-side application, where still only JScript
5.6 is used, an implementation of ECMAScript Edition 3 (CMIIW). Therefore,
it would be correct to say that server-side JScript supports classes and
strict typing, while client-side JScript does not; this would be quite a
difference between the two.
PointedEars

[Roman Ziak]

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

Julian Turner wrote:

Jamiil wrote:

I have been reading a book on JavaScript that is mostly for the
client-side, however, I'd like to learn the language from the
server-side, is there a book anyone could recomend?
TIA

From my own knowledge, JScript (MS implementation of ECMA script) for
ASP server side is identical to JScript in the browser [...]

I would consider this to be wrong, because server-side JScript.NET is there,
as an implementation of the _ECMAScript_ Edition 4 proposal, while AFAIK it
has not spread yet to a client-side application, where still only JScript
5.6 is used, an implementation of ECMAScript Edition 3 (CMIIW). Therefore,
it would be correct to say that server-side JScript supports classes and
strict typing, while client-side JScript does not; this would be quite a
difference between the two.
PointedEars

Thomas, there is nothing wrong with Julian answer. ASP is not ASP.NET.

ASP.NET uses JScript.NET and ASP uses whichever version of ActiveScript
engine is configured as JScript, most likely JScript v5.6 these days.
Same language engine will be used on that machine for IE, ASP, WSH and
any application hosting JScript.

Jamil, instead of book I recomend MSDN

http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/de...eservpages.asp

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Roman Ziak wrote:

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

Julian Turner wrote:

Jamiil wrote:
I have been reading a book on JavaScript that is mostly for the
client-side, however, I'd like to learn the language from the
server-side, is there a book anyone could recomend?
TIA
From my own knowledge, JScript (MS implementation of ECMA script) for
ASP server side is identical to JScript in the browser [...]
I would consider this to be wrong, because server-side JScript.NET is
there, as an implementation of the _ECMAScript_ Edition 4 proposal, while
AFAIK it has not spread yet to a client-side application, where still
only JScript 5.6 is used, an implementation of ECMAScript Edition 3
(CMIIW). Therefore, it would be correct to say that server-side JScript
supports classes and strict typing, while client-side JScript does not;
this would be quite a difference between the two.
[...]

Thomas, there is nothing wrong with Julian answer. ASP is not ASP.NET.

Of course they are not.
ASP.NET uses JScript.NET and ASP uses whichever version of ActiveScript
engine is configured as JScript, most likely JScript v5.6 these days.
Most likely not. Since you are talking about _Microsoft_ ASP, read this:

,-<URL:http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/iissdk/html/cccf225f-d2ab-472e-a388-e08dcdba479f.asp>
|
| Changes in ASP Features in IIS 6.0
|
| Changes in ASP Features
|
| * ASP Pages are Disabled by Default
|
| In order to take a more proactive stance against malicious users and
| attackers, IIS is not installed on members of the Microsoft® Windows®
| Server 2003 family by default. Furthermore, when you initially install
| IIS, the service is installed in a highly secure and "locked" mode. By
| default, IIS serves only static content — meaning features like ASP,
| ASP.NET, Server-Side Includes, WebDAV publishing, and FrontPage® Server
| Extensions do not work unless enabled.

I understand this as if you can enable ASP and then you enable ASP.NET as
well.
Same language engine will be used on that machine for IE, ASP, WSH and
any application hosting JScript.

Not quite.
PointedEars

[Roman Ziak]

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

Roman Ziak wrote:

<snip>

ASP.NET uses JScript.NET and ASP uses whichever version of ActiveScript
engine is configured as JScript, most likely JScript v5.6 these days.
Most likely not. Since you are talking about _Microsoft_ ASP, read this:

,-<URL:http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/iissdk/html/cccf225f-d2ab-472e-a388-e08dcdba479f.asp>
|
| Changes in ASP Features in IIS 6.0
|
| Changes in ASP Features
|
| * ASP Pages are Disabled by Default
|
| In order to take a more proactive stance against malicious users and
| attackers, IIS is not installed on members of the Microsoft® Windows®
| Server 2003 family by default. Furthermore, when you initially install
| IIS, the service is installed in a highly secure and "locked" mode. By
| default, IIS serves only static content — meaning features like ASP,
| ASP.NET, Server-Side Includes, WebDAV publishing, and FrontPage® Server
| Extensions do not work unless enabled.

Relevance ?

I understand this as if you can enable ASP and then you enable ASP.NET as
well.

Same language engine will be used on that machine for IE, ASP, WSH and
any application hosting JScript.

Not quite.

I do not wish to continue this argument, but for other readers
interested in this matter here is a 5-10 minutes experiment on switching
Windows JavaScript engine to other than JScript for all three hosts: IE,
ASP and WSH.
1. download DMDscript: http://www.digitalmars.com/dscript/cppscript.html
2. unpack it and when in the same directory, type on command line

regsvr32 dscript.dll
treatas jscript dmdscript
3. navigate *IE* here: http://www.digitalmars.com/dscript/sieve.html

*result:* ScriptEngine DMDScript Build Wed Jun 19 00:17:15 2002
4. create the following file and double click (*WSH*):

--- wsh.js

WScript.Echo("ScriptEngine " + ScriptEngine() + " Build " +
ScriptEngineBuildVersion());

---

*result:* ScriptEngine DMDScript Build Wed Jun 19 00:17:15 2002
5. create the folowing file

--- c:\Inetpub\wwwroot\info.asp

<%@ Language="JScript" %>
<% Response.Write("ScriptEngine " + ScriptEngine() + " Build " +
ScriptEngineBuildVersion()) %>

---
6. enable IIS and navigate any browser to ASP page http://localhost/info.asp

*result:* ScriptEngine DMDScript Build Wed Jun 19 00:17:15 2002
7. type on command line

regsvr32 /u dscript.dll
treatas jscript
8. now you may delete DMDscript (or keep it:) and you optionally may
restart IIS to flush the cache, otherwise info.asp will still be showing
DMDscript

net stop w3svc
net start w3svc
For simplicity, experiment made assumptions for default Windows
installation (IIS root directory, WSH opening *.js files, etc). Of
course, the ASP part will not work on Windows w/o IIS like Win98 or XP Home.

Roman

[Julian Turner]

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

I would consider this to be wrong, because server-side JScript.NET is there,
as an implementation of the _ECMAScript_ Edition 4 proposal
I understand the point you are making, and have appreciated the
discussion between Roman Ziak and yourself.

I had overlooked JScript.NET as an option, as I had only been using
Chilisoft ASP "classic" (as acquired by Sun).
, while AFAIK it
has not spread yet to a client-side application, where still only JScript
5.6 is used, an implementation of ECMAScript Edition 3 (CMIIW).
I guess the move to Edition 4 client side will only start to happen
once Edition 4 has been finalised. As everyone will have seen from
Brendan's roadmap <URL:http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/roadmap/> there
may, if I understand it correctly, be some differences between the
Edition 4 proposal and the final Edition 4, such as the way that
variable "typing" is handled.
Therefore,
it would be correct to say that server-side JScript supports classes and
strict typing, while client-side JScript does not; this would be quite a
difference between the two.

The assumption being that you are using JScript.NET?

Regards

Julian Turner

[Drakazz]

PHP is quiet alike JavaScript.
After coding some JavaScript, it's not that hard to go back to PHP :)

http://phpjs.berlios.de/

Very interesitn gthat i found.
You can easily make it run your JavaScript code under PHP - Just awsome
;)

Regards

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Julian Turner wrote:

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

I would consider this to be wrong, because server-side JScript.NET is
there, as an implementation of the _ECMAScript_ Edition 4 proposal
I understand the point you are making, and have appreciated the
discussion between Roman Ziak and yourself.

I had overlooked JScript.NET as an option, as I had only been using
Chilisoft ASP "classic" (as acquired by Sun).

ACK

, while AFAIK it
has not spread yet to a client-side application, where still only JScript
5.6 is used, an implementation of ECMAScript Edition 3 (CMIIW).

I guess the move to Edition 4 client side will only start to happen
once Edition 4 has been finalised.

Perhaps. I am not sure yet whether there can be JScript.NET client-side
right now, since there is a .NET support supplement you can install to
Windows 2k already.
As everyone will have seen from Brendan's roadmap
<URL:http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/roadmap/> there
may, if I understand it correctly, be some differences between the
Edition 4 proposal and the final Edition 4, such as the way that
variable "typing" is handled.

Such as? (Brendan is writing about JS2, not ECMAScript Edition 4, although
he says that his ideas are "shared in large part by ECMA TG1 for ECMA-262
Edition 4".)

Therefore, it would be correct to say that server-side JScript supports
classes and strict typing, while client-side JScript does not; this would
be quite a difference between the two.

The assumption being that you are using JScript.NET?

Yes. AIUI, ASP.NET replaces ASP in current IIS versions.
PointedEars

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Drakazz wrote:

PHP is quiet alike JavaScript.

Are you referring to something?
PointedEars

[Evertjan.]

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote on 03 apr 2006 in comp.lang.javascript:

Drakazz wrote:

PHP is quiet alike JavaScript.

Are you referring to something?

Sssssssssssssst !

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

[Drakazz]

Syntax?:)

in php:
$object->command();

in JS:
object.command();

in php:
for ( $i = 0; $i < 10; $i++) {
echo $i;
}

JS:
for(i=0;i<10;i++){
alert(i);
}

both the same:
function something() {
//Returns true
return true;
}

arrays are bit different.

Well, reallyit'sjust the syntax. You have totalyl different ways of
doing things. for example in JS you'd do string.toLowerCase(); etc.

I just wonder...
If PHP was rebuilt to support ECMAScript :)

[Evertjan.]

Drakazz wrote on 06 apr 2006 in comp.lang.javascript:

Syntax?:)

Are you replying on something?

Please quote what you are replying to.

If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, 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/googlegroupsreply/>

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

[Julian Turner]

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

[snip]

Perhaps. I am not sure yet whether there can be JScript.NET client-side
right now, since there is a .NET support supplement you can install to
Windows 2k already.
[/snip]

Interesting. Do you have a link for this?

[snip]

Edition 4 proposal and the final Edition 4, such as the way that
variable "typing" is handled.

Such as? (Brendan is writing about JS2, not ECMAScript Edition 4, although
he says that his ideas are "shared in large part by ECMA TG1 for ECMA-262
Edition 4".)
I think I am misunderstanding something about the relationship between
the development of JS2 and ECMA Edition 4.

The 'typing' point was the use of the colon " : " to declare a type.
Brendan's notes on JS2, are strongly in the direction of using "as",
"is" and "to".

[snip] Yes. AIUI, ASP.NET replaces ASP in current IIS versions.

Thanks.

Regards

Julian

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Julian Turner wrote:

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

Perhaps. I am not sure yet whether there can be JScript.NET client-side
right now, since there is a .NET support supplement you can install to
Windows 2k already.
Interesting. Do you have a link for this?

I saw it when using <URL:http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com/>.
Probably there is a regular download available at microsoft.com.

> Edition 4 proposal and the final Edition 4, such as the way that
> variable "typing" is handled.

Such as? (Brendan is writing about JS2, not ECMAScript Edition 4,
although he says that his ideas are "shared in large part by ECMA TG1
for ECMA-262 Edition 4".)

I think I am misunderstanding something about the relationship between
the development of JS2 and ECMA Edition 4.

s/ECMA/ECMAScript (ECMA-262)/
The 'typing' point was the use of the colon " : " to declare a type.
And I can see no differences between the new JS2 proposal and the
currently published ES4 proposal here.

<URL:http://www.mozilla.org/js/language/es4/>
Brendan's notes on JS2, are strongly in the direction of using "as",
"is" and "to".

The differences between the two proposals are here, where Brendan
suggests a different type hierarchy, where those type operators
would come in handy. They are mentioned in the currently published
proposal already, but AFAIS they are not well-defined there.
PointedEars

[Julian Turner]

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

[snip]

I saw it when using <URL:http://windowsupdate.microsoft.com/>.
Probably there is a regular download available at microsoft.com.
Thank you, I will take a look.

[snip] And I can see no differences between the new JS2 proposal and the
currently published ES4 proposal here.

<URL:http://www.mozilla.org/js/language/es4/>

Thank you, that link, and the link in it to JS2.0 makes it clear to me
now.

[snip]

Brendan's notes on JS2, are strongly in the direction of using "as",
"is" and "to".

The differences between the two proposals are here, where Brendan
suggests a different type hierarchy, where those type operators
would come in handy. They are mentioned in the currently published
proposal already, but AFAIS they are not well-defined there.

Thanks Thomas. I appreciate the comments.

Regards

Julian