Yann-Erwan Perio wrote:
Richard Cornford wrote:
<snip>
(which I will happily accept as normally state of the art)
Beware not to! I'm just doing programming as a hobby,
so the way I write things is just as I feel them, it's
not based on sound theoretical knowledge or design
experience.
<snip>
Be that as it may, I make my judgement on the code that I see. When you
post a complete solution what I see is just that: complete, form
conception through design to implementation. All of the permutations of
the execution environment considered and planed behaviour at the end of
every branch, and implemented to efficiently take advantage of the
language and its nature. Scripts that will get the best form whatever
browser they are exposed to, providing functional enhancements when they
can and cleanly degrading to viable underlying HTML when they can't.
Scripts that exemplify the appropriate use of javascript without being
trivial. (Subject to the occasional slips and omissions that being human
renders us all victims of.)
When so few people even perceive the intellectual challenge in Internet
browser script design, examples of authors that rise to the challenge
and produce scripts that fully address the issues are rare. You post
scripts that are consistently at the very top end of the range of
standards presented here (and often exhibit an aesthetic quality that
makes them interesting reading in their own right). If scripts among the
highest standard I see don't qualify as state of the art then I don't
know what would.
Richard.
