473,326 Members | 2,126 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
Post Job

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Join Bytes to post your question to a community of 473,326 software developers and data experts.

Which Is The Better Approach To Working With Javascript?


Which is the better approach in working with Javascript?

1. Server side processing: Web server gets form input, runs it into the
Javascript module, and PHP collects the output for document prep.

2. Client side processing: Web server gets form input and passes it to PHP
which includes the Javascript written in a way to make the form input
processed on the client side and rendered (probably using DOM function
calls) on that side as well.

I posted this <news:Xn******************@216.168.3.44in an apparently
less trafficked newsgroup and the post was the TLDR kind, but it has the
background and details of why the code must be in Javascript and why PHP
must work with it somehow. It also gives the details of the server and how
it forks and communicates with processes to parse/generate output.
Jul 8 '08
84 3849
Barry wrote:
"Ivan Marsh" <iv*******@yahoo.comwrote in message
news:pa****************************@yahoo.com...
>On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 13:54:18 -0500, Barry wrote:

>>"Ivan Marsh" <iv*******@yahoo.comwrote in message
news:pa****************************@yahoo.com. ..
On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 12:36:39 -0500, Barry wrote:
"Tim Streater" <ti**********@dante.org.ukwrote in message
news:ti********************************@news.i ndividual.net...
>In article <CG************@newsfe07.lga>, "Barry"
><no****@example.comwrote:
>>
>>"Tim Streater" <ti**********@dante.org.ukwrote in message
>>news:ti********************************@news .individual.net...
>>>In article <Ll***************@newsfe06.lga>, "Barry"
>>><no****@example.comwrote:
>>>>
>>>>"Jerry Stuckle" <js*******@attglobal.netwrote in message
>>>>news:g5**********@registered.motzarella.or g...
>>>>>bill wrote:
>>>>>>Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>>[snip]
>>>>
>>>>>>>What interpreters are available for javascript on the server,
>>>>>>>and what
>>>>>>>hosts have it installed?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>It is not part of the package of any web server.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server-side_JavaScript
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>And how about the second part of the question - what hosts have
>>>>>such packages installed?
>>>>i like how you can speak for all web server installations, jerry.
>>>>further,
>>>>when proven wrong about js being client-side only, you just
>>>>change pace
>>>>and
>>>>say, 'well, no one has that on their server!'. you simply tried
>>>>to speak
>>>>with authority on a topic you obviously know nothing about. why
>>>>not just
>>>>say
>>>>you were wrong and then move on?
>>>Because he's not wrong in any material sense.
>>the 'material sense' would be that he can't know what is installed
>>on every
>>web server out there. obviously, materially, if development is being
>>done on
>>products such as LiveWire and other server-side javascripting
>>engines then
>>there are web servers with such animals installed.
>Of course not, bozo. I hadn't heard about this server side stuff
>either, but as it never gets mentioned on comp.lang.javascript it's
>obviously close to irrelevant.
>>
>My JavaScript book mentions a couple of times in its intro that "...
>JavaScript can even be run on a server ..." and then goes on to take
>1500 pages to explain about client-side.
>>
>Hence my use of the word "material".
skirting the error and saying *no one* has a web server set up to do
ss-js is likewise wrong.
Except that Jerry didn't say that.

Assuming he was unaware that javascript can be run server-side, asking
what hosts provide it is a perfectly reasonable question.
it is a safe assumption indeed, since he said it (noting the 'NOT'
emphasis)...

"Hint: javascript does NOT run on the server." - stuckle (read his first
response to the op...this was the second sentence)

asking what hosts provides the service was not a question, rather it was
his case in point...

"It is not part of the package of any web server." - stuckle (see above
quote in-line)

the next statement in his following response was...

"...what hosts have such packages installed?"

that's merely baiting his opponent, daring him to name one...i.e. 'if
you're right, then show me one.'. it's a pretty lame tactic loved by
those how cannot debate or know they can't defend their original
position and don't want to come out and say they were wrong.
I was not aware you can read minds. I apologize for questioning your
omniscience.

btw, aside from having reading comprehension skills, i also rarely
contradict myself...especially so daftly as to do it one sentence after
another...as in:

"I hadn't heard about this server side stuff either."

directly followed by:

"My JavaScript book mentions a couple of times in its intro that '...
JavaScript can even be run on a server ...'"

i hope you can appreciate my amusement on that one as well.

LOL. Surely I can.
Jul 9 '08 #51
Animesh K wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>
And how about the second part of the question - what hosts have such
packages installed?

I agree with your point that Javascript makes more sense on the client
side. However, why do you think that there are so many packages without
any hosts installing them?
Probably because PHP, Perl and other server-side scripting languages are
better?

As I asked - but Barry sidestepped the issue because he couldn't answer
- who has server-side javascript installed?

Others have indicated hosts will install it for a charge. But will
they, and if so, how much?

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
js*******@attglobal.net
==================

Jul 9 '08 #52
Barry wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.cwrote in message
news:12****************@proxy00.news.clara.net...
>Michael Fesser wrote:
>>.oO(The Natural Philosopher)

Patient Guy wrote:
So, based on your response, you are telling me that a PHP processing
implementation has no interprocess communication capability, or ability
to interface with a (Java)script interpreter.
>
Java SCRIPT (as opposed to java) runs in the browser exclusively.
Wrong. Various engines for running JS outside a browser context exist,
as already mentioned in the thread. JS is already incorporated in a
number of applications and document types that have nothing to do with
HTML or a browser.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Javascr...side_web_pages

It makes local decsison without reference to the server. This is great
for speed..you can change screen appearance fast and dynamically,
producing e.g. drop down menus and the like) at the expense of having to
download all the code TO the browser and more data than you probably
need.

PHP is EXCLUSIVELY server side
PHP can also run in a browser (a proof-of-concept plugin for IE exists),
on the local machine, as a shell script, with a GUI ... It could even be
used like JS or Python for scripting in standalone applications.

Halfway huse s do exist - Ajax - where partial page reloads are done
dynamically, using I think javascipt on e browser and PHP server side.
AJAX has nothing to do with either of them, at least not by definition.
It's just an overestimated hype, but in fact it's nothing new. It's just
a slightly different way for sending HTTP requests, but doesn't say
anything about the language(s) to use or the type of data that's sent.

A plugin or even an external application might be able to access the
browser's XHR object directly without any JavaScript, and the data
doesn't have to be in XML format. So what's left from "AJAX" in
practice? Just the "A" for asynchronous.

A server, or a server-associated process, can start a script host,
passing some form of input to it, and the script host does the script
interpretation, while the calling process waits for output.
However this is achieved, PHP (by design?) has no script interface,
based on your response.
>
Oh, its perfectly possible to pass commands from PHP to some other
engine: teh classic example is the Mysql server, which is interfaced to
PHP with a library ..but no one would ever attempt to execuste java
SCRIPT on the server
There's no reason to not do it. And in fact some do.

because its a bloody awful language
Depends. It's a totally different way of thinking and programming. You
simply can't compare it with a classical OOP language. But once you've
understood it, you might find prototype-based programming quite useful
in certain situations.

and is only by and large written for broswers.
No language is written just for a single environment.

Once you are server side you can in principle write in any language you
like, PHP being just a common popular one, but shell script python, C,
C++. PERL Java and so on are perfectly possible.
Exactly. You can use _every_ programming language you like. And JS
undoubtly _is_ a programming language.

Micha
Strictly you are correct. In practice for most people I stand by the
original post.

I see almost no reason to use javascript at all except when its the only
option, and that is the case when its the only (well supported) language a
browser can run.

Likewise expecting people to have php plugins for their browsers..is..at
best, expecting a lot.
Oh, and several languages have been written for a single environment: I
wrote one myself in fact.

'several' is not 'one'...and i hardly think anyone but you actually uses
your home-brewed version. ;^)

can you name another of the several?
Basically of course not: By definition they were and are specialised
things, used in specialised environments. Like macro languages for
speialised apps..

Mine went into a product to store commands and data for a large bulb
matrix display for a sports arena. No one but me and whoever maintained
that code after me knew what it was, since a primitive GUI interface
(pre windows here) constructed it, and a bit of 8086 assembler
interpreted it and threw high speed serial commands down a piece of wire
to the display.

And I never gave it a name either: it was just a sort of communications
code: byte one tells you what it is, byte two tells you how LONG it is
and teh rest of the bytes are the data...

Want more? how about the actual machine microcode in a modern processor.
That interprets what you call machine code, and turns into intra chip
instructions like 'flip that pin high'

Then there is stuff like HPGL interpreters, only ever designed to drive
plotter heads.

There were more than a few application and even chip specific low level
languages around when I worked on military radar.

General purpose languages - algol, cobol, B, bcpl, fortran, forth,
basic, java, pascal, C, lisp, and so on are the exceptions, not the
rule. Assembler languages are designed to work on a specific chipset:
they have little meaning outside of it.
Javshite was designed - if that isn't too strong a word - to make
browsers do tricks.

It wasn;t origally deigned as a general purpose language at all.
The fact that you can get bits of it to work independently of a browser
environment and the DOM is an a curious aberration, Like getting a
monkey to drive a car. I will admit its possible, but I cant see the
point really.

Jul 9 '08 #53
Ivan Marsh wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 16:49:01 -0400, John W Kennedy wrote:
>Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>Hint: javascript does NOT run on the server.
Actually, server JavaScript was the original language of the
HTML-embedded class now dominated by JSP, ASP, and PHP.

Since Javascript and PHP both originate in 1995 I'm not sure how you can
make that assertion.
Odd that ..I am sure we were running CGI based on scripts and PERL and C
earlier than that, too.
Jul 9 '08 #54
Barry wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.cwrote in message
news:12****************@proxy00.news.clara.net...
>Michael Fesser wrote:
>>.oO(The Natural Philosopher)

Patient Guy wrote:
So, based on your response, you are telling me that a PHP processing
implementation has no interprocess communication capability, or ability
to interface with a (Java)script interpreter.
>
Java SCRIPT (as opposed to java) runs in the browser exclusively.
Wrong. Various engines for running JS outside a browser context exist,
as already mentioned in the thread. JS is already incorporated in a
number of applications and document types that have nothing to do with
HTML or a browser.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Javascr...side_web_pages

It makes local decsison without reference to the server. This is great
for speed..you can change screen appearance fast and dynamically,
producing e.g. drop down menus and the like) at the expense of having to
download all the code TO the browser and more data than you probably
need.

PHP is EXCLUSIVELY server side
PHP can also run in a browser (a proof-of-concept plugin for IE exists),
on the local machine, as a shell script, with a GUI ... It could even be
used like JS or Python for scripting in standalone applications.

Halfway huse s do exist - Ajax - where partial page reloads are done
dynamically, using I think javascipt on e browser and PHP server side.
AJAX has nothing to do with either of them, at least not by definition.
It's just an overestimated hype, but in fact it's nothing new. It's just
a slightly different way for sending HTTP requests, but doesn't say
anything about the language(s) to use or the type of data that's sent.

A plugin or even an external application might be able to access the
browser's XHR object directly without any JavaScript, and the data
doesn't have to be in XML format. So what's left from "AJAX" in
practice? Just the "A" for asynchronous.

A server, or a server-associated process, can start a script host,
passing some form of input to it, and the script host does the script
interpretation, while the calling process waits for output.
However this is achieved, PHP (by design?) has no script interface,
based on your response.
>
Oh, its perfectly possible to pass commands from PHP to some other
engine: teh classic example is the Mysql server, which is interfaced to
PHP with a library ..but no one would ever attempt to execuste java
SCRIPT on the server
There's no reason to not do it. And in fact some do.

because its a bloody awful language
Depends. It's a totally different way of thinking and programming. You
simply can't compare it with a classical OOP language. But once you've
understood it, you might find prototype-based programming quite useful
in certain situations.

and is only by and large written for broswers.
No language is written just for a single environment.

Once you are server side you can in principle write in any language you
like, PHP being just a common popular one, but shell script python, C,
C++. PERL Java and so on are perfectly possible.
Exactly. You can use _every_ programming language you like. And JS
undoubtly _is_ a programming language.

Micha
Strictly you are correct. In practice for most people I stand by the
original post.

I see almost no reason to use javascript at all except when its the only
option, and that is the case when its the only (well supported) language a
browser can run.

Likewise expecting people to have php plugins for their browsers..is..at
best, expecting a lot.
Oh, and several languages have been written for a single environment: I
wrote one myself in fact.

'several' is not 'one'...and i hardly think anyone but you actually uses
your home-brewed version. ;^)

can you name another of the several?
PL/S. Used internally by IBM for system development in the 80's, it was
a subset of PL/1 with inline assembler.

Microcode for any of the microprocessors out there. All are written in
specialized languages (same for microcode on mainframes).

There are lots of specialized languages out there. But since they are
specialized, you seldom hear of them unless you have a need for them.
Not that there's anything secret about most - just that they are seldom
mentioned outside of the groups which use them.
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
js*******@attglobal.net
==================

Jul 9 '08 #55
..oO(The Natural Philosopher)
>Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>
And what do you do when you have a power outage?

Reboot it.
>Or your phone line
goes down?

It doesn't. Ok ther was the time a tipper truck ripped it off..they
fixed it at their eopnse withing 24 houers.
>Or the server crashes the day after you leave on a two week
vacation?

I dont do vacations anymore, and if I do, we have a computer guru in to
look after the cats.

And linux doesn't crash. Ok one day the hard disk will go and it will
take two days top restore from backups and rebuild.

Its a SMALL SITE jerry.
My uptimes are actually BETTER than some large ones..
The most important thing besides all the others that were mentioned here
is security. A machine directly connected to the open Internet becomes a
combatant in an endless battle and a constant target for all kinds of
attacks. I hope that you

* have a good firewall concept
* use packet filtering and maybe an IDS
* shut down all unnecessary services
* follow security mailing lists
* keep the server software up-to-date
* ...

These are just some of the things that a host's admin is paid for and
which distinguish the little private admin-wannabe from a professional.
There are good reasons why in most cases a dedicated, but managed
machine is the recommended solution if you want run your own server.

Don't get me wrong - I don't know much about you or your knowledge, so
the above are just some general considerations. But too many people try
that and then one day they come back to the newsgroups crying "Help!!!!
I've been hacked!!!!!!11"

Micha
Jul 9 '08 #56
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Javshite was designed - if that isn't too strong a word - to make
browsers do tricks.

It wasn;t origally deigned as a general purpose language at all.
Netscape released both Netscape Navigator 2.0, with JavaScript in the
client, and Netscape Enterprise Server 2.0, with JavaScript in a
PHP-like role, in March, 1996.
--
John W. Kennedy
"Never try to take over the international economy based on a radical
feminist agenda if you're not sure your leader isn't a transvestite."
-- David Misch: "She-Spies", "While You Were Out"
Jul 9 '08 #57
Ivan Marsh wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 16:49:01 -0400, John W Kennedy wrote:
>Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>Hint: javascript does NOT run on the server.
Actually, server JavaScript was the original language of the
HTML-embedded class now dominated by JSP, ASP, and PHP.

Since Javascript and PHP both originate in 1995 I'm not sure how you can
make that assertion.
I didn't know PHP was quite that old. In any case, in 1996, server-side
JavaScript was in the major server product from the then major player
(Netscape Enterprise Server 2.0), and PHP was a personal project.
--
John W. Kennedy
"When a man contemplates forcing his own convictions down another
man's throat, he is contemplating both an unchristian act and an act of
treason to the United States."
-- Joy Davidman, "Smoke on the Mountain"
Jul 9 '08 #58
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Ivan Marsh wrote:
>On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 16:49:01 -0400, John W Kennedy wrote:
>>Jerry Stuckle wrote:
Hint: javascript does NOT run on the server.
Actually, server JavaScript was the original language of the
HTML-embedded class now dominated by JSP, ASP, and PHP.

Since Javascript and PHP both originate in 1995 I'm not sure how you can
make that assertion.
Odd that ..I am sure we were running CGI based on scripts and PERL and C
earlier than that, too.
CGI isn't HTML-embedded, by definition.

--
John W. Kennedy
"There are those who argue that everything breaks even in this old
dump of a world of ours. I suppose these ginks who argue that way hold
that because the rich man gets ice in the summer and the poor man gets
it in the winter things are breaking even for both. Maybe so, but I'll
swear I can't see it that way."
-- The last words of Bat Masterson
Jul 9 '08 #59

"Jerry Stuckle" <js*******@attglobal.netwrote in message
news:g5**********@registered.motzarella.org...
Animesh K wrote:
>Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>>
And how about the second part of the question - what hosts have such
packages installed?

I agree with your point that Javascript makes more sense on the client
side. However, why do you think that there are so many packages without
any hosts installing them?

Probably because PHP, Perl and other server-side scripting languages are
better?
better? for what? that is completely relative, jerry, to what it is that is
to be done with said language. php is robust, but math is not it's
strong-suit and math is, after all, what the OP is talking about. i'm not
saying that javascript is ideal for math either, but i'd be willing to give
the original author enough credit to consider what tool is best for a given
job...something you're hinting at completely overlooking with that
statement.

As I asked - but Barry sidestepped the issue because he couldn't answer -
who has server-side javascript installed?
no one is side-stepping anything jerry! well, you might be by asking the
question...but you did say you were wrong with your first statement that js
is exclusively a client-sided language, so, i'll lay off taking your
question about who has ss-js installed...for now.

what i'm curious about is what it has to do with anything. are your wanting
to know so that you can try it out or something? most any host will rent you
a server and configure it however you want it set up. since there are
multiple ss-js interpreters available to install and nothing preventing any
server (from a desktop po-dunk pc to a linux matrix server bank running
zeus), i fail to see how it is relevant to the OP. would you do me the honor
of filling me in?

oh, and if you're going to assumptions, make sure you make your leaps from
known points. you should have gathered that i and the 4 others you've asked
that of are saying the same thing - it is irrelevant...it is NOT because we
cannot answer the question. i'll be happy to answer the question by
installing it on one of my servers and answering, 'MINE' if that will
suffice.
Others have indicated hosts will install it for a charge. But will they,
and if so, how much?
and that is relevant how, jerry? the answer is yes, they will install it.
how much is called 'shopping'. i will find the best value for my money and
the need of the package is going to dictate how much i'm willing to spend.
again though, why does this matter...at all?
Jul 10 '08 #60

"The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.cwrote in message
news:12****************@proxy02.news.clara.net...
Barry wrote:
>"The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.cwrote in message
news:12****************@proxy00.news.clara.net. ..
>>Michael Fesser wrote:
.oO(The Natural Philosopher)

Patient Guy wrote:
>So, based on your response, you are telling me that a PHP processing
>implementation has no interprocess communication capability, or
>ability to interface with a (Java)script interpreter.
>>
Java SCRIPT (as opposed to java) runs in the browser exclusively.
Wrong. Various engines for running JS outside a browser context exist,
as already mentioned in the thread. JS is already incorporated in a
number of applications and document types that have nothing to do with
HTML or a browser.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Javascr...side_web_pages

It makes local decsison without reference to the server. This is great
for speed..you can change screen appearance fast and dynamically,
producing e.g. drop down menus and the like) at the expense of having
to download all the code TO the browser and more data than you
probably need.
>
PHP is EXCLUSIVELY server side
PHP can also run in a browser (a proof-of-concept plugin for IE
exists),
on the local machine, as a shell script, with a GUI ... It could even
be
used like JS or Python for scripting in standalone applications.

Halfway huse s do exist - Ajax - where partial page reloads are done
dynamically, using I think javascipt on e browser and PHP server side.
AJAX has nothing to do with either of them, at least not by definition.
It's just an overestimated hype, but in fact it's nothing new. It's
just
a slightly different way for sending HTTP requests, but doesn't say
anything about the language(s) to use or the type of data that's sent.

A plugin or even an external application might be able to access the
browser's XHR object directly without any JavaScript, and the data
doesn't have to be in XML format. So what's left from "AJAX" in
practice? Just the "A" for asynchronous.

>A server, or a server-associated process, can start a script host,
>passing some form of input to it, and the script host does the script
>interpretation, while the calling process waits for output.
>However this is achieved, PHP (by design?) has no script interface,
>based on your response.
>>
Oh, its perfectly possible to pass commands from PHP to some other
engine: teh classic example is the Mysql server, which is interfaced
to PHP with a library ..but no one would ever attempt to execuste java
SCRIPT on the server
There's no reason to not do it. And in fact some do.

because its a bloody awful language
Depends. It's a totally different way of thinking and programming. You
simply can't compare it with a classical OOP language. But once you've
understood it, you might find prototype-based programming quite useful
in certain situations.

and is only by and large written for broswers.
No language is written just for a single environment.

Once you are server side you can in principle write in any language
you like, PHP being just a common popular one, but shell script
python, C, C++. PERL Java and so on are perfectly possible.
Exactly. You can use _every_ programming language you like. And JS
undoubtly _is_ a programming language.

Micha
Strictly you are correct. In practice for most people I stand by the
original post.

I see almost no reason to use javascript at all except when its the only
option, and that is the case when its the only (well supported) language
a browser can run.

Likewise expecting people to have php plugins for their browsers..is..at
best, expecting a lot.
Oh, and several languages have been written for a single environment: I
wrote one myself in fact.

'several' is not 'one'...and i hardly think anyone but you actually uses
your home-brewed version. ;^)

can you name another of the several?

Basically of course not: By definition they were and are specialised
things, used in specialised environments. Like macro languages for
speialised apps..

Mine went into a product to store commands and data for a large bulb
matrix display for a sports arena. No one but me and whoever maintained
that code after me knew what it was, since a primitive GUI interface (pre
windows here) constructed it, and a bit of 8086 assembler interpreted it
and threw high speed serial commands down a piece of wire to the display.

And I never gave it a name either: it was just a sort of communications
code: byte one tells you what it is, byte two tells you how LONG it is and
teh rest of the bytes are the data...

Want more? how about the actual machine microcode in a modern processor.
That interprets what you call machine code, and turns into intra chip
instructions like 'flip that pin high'

Then there is stuff like HPGL interpreters, only ever designed to drive
plotter heads.

There were more than a few application and even chip specific low level
languages around when I worked on military radar.

General purpose languages - algol, cobol, B, bcpl, fortran, forth, basic,
java, pascal, C, lisp, and so on are the exceptions, not the rule.
Assembler languages are designed to work on a specific chipset: they have
little meaning outside of it.
Javshite was designed - if that isn't too strong a word - to make browsers
do tricks.

It wasn;t origally deigned as a general purpose language at all.
The fact that you can get bits of it to work independently of a browser
environment and the DOM is an a curious aberration, Like getting a monkey
to drive a car. I will admit its possible, but I cant see the point
really.
all good points, however languages like PLC ladder logic and assembly are
really the exceptions since most languages that exist are 4GL. assembly (et.
al.) are only target-specific based on OS & hardware anyway, and that at
compile time. so, i can use assembly to program a cell phone or a pc or an
eprom. the point is, the language is only context-specific in terms of what
it is meant to handle, which is low level, granularity control of hardware
and circuitry. still, those examples fail to live up to what you're saying
since no assembly language i know of will only work a specific chipset, as
you say. they may have different contraints on features that can be used per
chipset or may require different compilers, however the comparison is like
PHP as CLI or CGI, etc..

as for javascript, yes, that is the origination but, like most other
burgeoning languages (PHP inclusive) they quickly outgrow the niche that
spurred their creation. case-in-point, perl.

but again, you do make a very good case that there are languages that do, in
fact, restrict themselves entirely to specific environments and
implementations. i just don't agree that these are the rule.

btw, my original reply to you was shearly in jest. :) why not name your
language? hell, if i made one, i'd at least have fun with naming it.

cheers.
Jul 10 '08 #61

"John W Kennedy" <jw*****@attglobal.netwrote in message
news:48**********************@cv.net...
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>Javshite was designed - if that isn't too strong a word - to make
browsers do tricks.

It wasn;t origally deigned as a general purpose language at all.

Netscape released both Netscape Navigator 2.0, with JavaScript in the
client, and Netscape Enterprise Server 2.0, with JavaScript in a PHP-like
role, in March, 1996.
yes john, but he means to prove the statement wrong that languages are
developed without context and implementation in mind. he is correct that js
was originally developed for the browser - strictly. whatever use we have of
it today is beside his having proved his argument correct.

cheers.
Jul 10 '08 #62

"Jerry Stuckle" <js*******@attglobal.netwrote in message
news:g5**********@registered.motzarella.org...
Barry wrote:
>"The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.cwrote in message
news:12****************@proxy00.news.clara.net. ..
>>Michael Fesser wrote:
.oO(The Natural Philosopher)

Patient Guy wrote:
>So, based on your response, you are telling me that a PHP processing
>implementation has no interprocess communication capability, or
>ability to interface with a (Java)script interpreter.
>>
Java SCRIPT (as opposed to java) runs in the browser exclusively.
Wrong. Various engines for running JS outside a browser context exist,
as already mentioned in the thread. JS is already incorporated in a
number of applications and document types that have nothing to do with
HTML or a browser.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Javascr...side_web_pages

It makes local decsison without reference to the server. This is great
for speed..you can change screen appearance fast and dynamically,
producing e.g. drop down menus and the like) at the expense of having
to download all the code TO the browser and more data than you
probably need.
>
PHP is EXCLUSIVELY server side
PHP can also run in a browser (a proof-of-concept plugin for IE
exists),
on the local machine, as a shell script, with a GUI ... It could even
be
used like JS or Python for scripting in standalone applications.

Halfway huse s do exist - Ajax - where partial page reloads are done
dynamically, using I think javascipt on e browser and PHP server side.
AJAX has nothing to do with either of them, at least not by definition.
It's just an overestimated hype, but in fact it's nothing new. It's
just
a slightly different way for sending HTTP requests, but doesn't say
anything about the language(s) to use or the type of data that's sent.

A plugin or even an external application might be able to access the
browser's XHR object directly without any JavaScript, and the data
doesn't have to be in XML format. So what's left from "AJAX" in
practice? Just the "A" for asynchronous.

>A server, or a server-associated process, can start a script host,
>passing some form of input to it, and the script host does the script
>interpretation, while the calling process waits for output.
>However this is achieved, PHP (by design?) has no script interface,
>based on your response.
>>
Oh, its perfectly possible to pass commands from PHP to some other
engine: teh classic example is the Mysql server, which is interfaced
to PHP with a library ..but no one would ever attempt to execuste java
SCRIPT on the server
There's no reason to not do it. And in fact some do.

because its a bloody awful language
Depends. It's a totally different way of thinking and programming. You
simply can't compare it with a classical OOP language. But once you've
understood it, you might find prototype-based programming quite useful
in certain situations.

and is only by and large written for broswers.
No language is written just for a single environment.

Once you are server side you can in principle write in any language
you like, PHP being just a common popular one, but shell script
python, C, C++. PERL Java and so on are perfectly possible.
Exactly. You can use _every_ programming language you like. And JS
undoubtly _is_ a programming language.

Micha
Strictly you are correct. In practice for most people I stand by the
original post.

I see almost no reason to use javascript at all except when its the only
option, and that is the case when its the only (well supported) language
a browser can run.

Likewise expecting people to have php plugins for their browsers..is..at
best, expecting a lot.
Oh, and several languages have been written for a single environment: I
wrote one myself in fact.

'several' is not 'one'...and i hardly think anyone but you actually uses
your home-brewed version. ;^)

can you name another of the several?

PL/S. Used internally by IBM for system development in the 80's, it was a
subset of PL/1 with inline assembler.

Microcode for any of the microprocessors out there. All are written in
specialized languages (same for microcode on mainframes).

There are lots of specialized languages out there. But since they are
specialized, you seldom hear of them unless you have a need for them. Not
that there's anything secret about most - just that they are seldom
mentioned outside of the groups which use them.
agreed, jerry. i was having fun with phil's one example to prove his point
being a homemade language. the question i posed was just encouragement from
him to follow with the route he (and you) just did.
Jul 10 '08 #63

"John W Kennedy" <jw*****@attglobal.netwrote in message
news:48**********************@cv.net...
Ivan Marsh wrote:
>On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 16:49:01 -0400, John W Kennedy wrote:
>>Jerry Stuckle wrote:
Hint: javascript does NOT run on the server.
Actually, server JavaScript was the original language of the
HTML-embedded class now dominated by JSP, ASP, and PHP.

Since Javascript and PHP both originate in 1995 I'm not sure how you can
make that assertion.

I didn't know PHP was quite that old. In any case, in 1996, server-side
JavaScript was in the major server product from the then major player
(Netscape Enterprise Server 2.0), and PHP was a personal project.
which could be the case in 1996, however in 1995 js was client-side. i will
relinquish my position should be vague recollections be proven wrong, but my
mind is still sharp and memory likewise still seems to serve. :)
Jul 10 '08 #64
Michael Fesser wrote:
.oO(The Natural Philosopher)
>Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>And what do you do when you have a power outage?
Reboot it.
>>Or your phone line
goes down?
It doesn't. Ok ther was the time a tipper truck ripped it off..they
fixed it at their eopnse withing 24 houers.
> >Or the server crashes the day after you leave on a two week
vacation?
I dont do vacations anymore, and if I do, we have a computer guru in to
look after the cats.

And linux doesn't crash. Ok one day the hard disk will go and it will
take two days top restore from backups and rebuild.

Its a SMALL SITE jerry.
My uptimes are actually BETTER than some large ones..

The most important thing besides all the others that were mentioned here
is security. A machine directly connected to the open Internet becomes a
combatant in an endless battle and a constant target for all kinds of
attacks. I hope that you

* have a good firewall concept
behind NAT router with only ports 80/https open
* use packet filtering and maybe an IDS
? the router does all that.
* shut down all unnecessary services
why? they are inaccessible. Except inside the firewall.
* follow security mailing lists
why? its not that serious.
* keep the server software up-to-date
why? Its not that serious.
* ...

These are just some of the things that a host's admin is paid for and
which distinguish the little private admin-wannabe from a professional.
There are good reasons why in most cases a dedicated, but managed
machine is the recommended solution if you want run your own server.

Don't get me wrong - I don't know much about you or your knowledge, so
the above are just some general considerations. But too many people try
that and then one day they come back to the newsgroups crying "Help!!!!
I've been hacked!!!!!!11"
Been up a couple of years, not been hacked.

Whats running? samba and AFP
Apache http/https. Only those ports are accessible extrenally.
Mysql (localhost only allowed)
various CUPS daemons.
Telneted
Ftpd.
Named
Squid.
webmin
Those are the only services that present IP ports. Only httpd/httpsd are
accessible.

There are probably some HTTP/Mysql exploits that might be used: haven't
fully gone into that but the data that might be used to carry any attack
is very limited
Micha
Jul 10 '08 #65
Barry wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.cwrote in message
news:12****************@proxy02.news.clara.net...
>Barry wrote:
>>"The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.cwrote in message
news:12****************@proxy00.news.clara.net.. .
Michael Fesser wrote:
.oO(The Natural Philosopher)
>
>Patient Guy wrote:
>>So, based on your response, you are telling me that a PHP processing
>>implementation has no interprocess communication capability, or
>>ability to interface with a (Java)script interpreter.
>>>
>Java SCRIPT (as opposed to java) runs in the browser exclusively.
Wrong. Various engines for running JS outside a browser context exist,
as already mentioned in the thread. JS is already incorporated in a
number of applications and document types that have nothing to do with
HTML or a browser.
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Javascr...side_web_pages
>
>It makes local decsison without reference to the server. This is great
>for speed..you can change screen appearance fast and dynamically,
>producing e.g. drop down menus and the like) at the expense of having
>to download all the code TO the browser and more data than you
>probably need.
>>
>PHP is EXCLUSIVELY server side
PHP can also run in a browser (a proof-of-concept plugin for IE
exists),
on the local machine, as a shell script, with a GUI ... It could even
be
used like JS or Python for scripting in standalone applications.
>
>Halfway huse s do exist - Ajax - where partial page reloads are done
>dynamically, using I think javascipt on e browser and PHP server side.
AJAX has nothing to do with either of them, at least not by definition.
It's just an overestimated hype, but in fact it's nothing new. It's
just
a slightly different way for sending HTTP requests, but doesn't say
anything about the language(s) to use or the type of data that's sent.
>
A plugin or even an external application might be able to access the
browser's XHR object directly without any JavaScript, and the data
doesn't have to be in XML format. So what's left from "AJAX" in
practice? Just the "A" for asynchronous.
>
>>A server, or a server-associated process, can start a script host,
>>passing some form of input to it, and the script host does the script
>>interpretation, while the calling process waits for output.
>>However this is achieved, PHP (by design?) has no script interface,
>>based on your response.
>>>
>Oh, its perfectly possible to pass commands from PHP to some other
>engine: teh classic example is the Mysql server, which is interfaced
>to PHP with a library ..but no one would ever attempt to execuste java
>SCRIPT on the server
There's no reason to not do it. And in fact some do.
>
>because its a bloody awful language
Depends. It's a totally different way of thinking and programming. You
simply can't compare it with a classical OOP language. But once you've
understood it, you might find prototype-based programming quite useful
in certain situations.
>
>and is only by and large written for broswers.
No language is written just for a single environment.
>
>Once you are server side you can in principle write in any language
>you like, PHP being just a common popular one, but shell script
>python, C, C++. PERL Java and so on are perfectly possible.
Exactly. You can use _every_ programming language you like. And JS
undoubtly _is_ a programming language.
>
Micha
Strictly you are correct. In practice for most people I stand by the
original post.

I see almost no reason to use javascript at all except when its the only
option, and that is the case when its the only (well supported) language
a browser can run.

Likewise expecting people to have php plugins for their browsers..is..at
best, expecting a lot.
Oh, and several languages have been written for a single environment: I
wrote one myself in fact.
'several' is not 'one'...and i hardly think anyone but you actually uses
your home-brewed version. ;^)

can you name another of the several?
Basically of course not: By definition they were and are specialised
things, used in specialised environments. Like macro languages for
speialised apps..

Mine went into a product to store commands and data for a large bulb
matrix display for a sports arena. No one but me and whoever maintained
that code after me knew what it was, since a primitive GUI interface (pre
windows here) constructed it, and a bit of 8086 assembler interpreted it
and threw high speed serial commands down a piece of wire to the display.

And I never gave it a name either: it was just a sort of communications
code: byte one tells you what it is, byte two tells you how LONG it is and
teh rest of the bytes are the data...

Want more? how about the actual machine microcode in a modern processor.
That interprets what you call machine code, and turns into intra chip
instructions like 'flip that pin high'

Then there is stuff like HPGL interpreters, only ever designed to drive
plotter heads.

There were more than a few application and even chip specific low level
languages around when I worked on military radar.

General purpose languages - algol, cobol, B, bcpl, fortran, forth, basic,
java, pascal, C, lisp, and so on are the exceptions, not the rule.
Assembler languages are designed to work on a specific chipset: they have
little meaning outside of it.
Javshite was designed - if that isn't too strong a word - to make browsers
do tricks.

It wasn;t origally deigned as a general purpose language at all.
The fact that you can get bits of it to work independently of a browser
environment and the DOM is an a curious aberration, Like getting a monkey
to drive a car. I will admit its possible, but I cant see the point
really.

all good points, however languages like PLC ladder logic and assembly are
really the exceptions since most languages that exist are 4GL. assembly (et.
al.) are only target-specific based on OS & hardware anyway, and that at
compile time. so, i can use assembly to program a cell phone or a pc or an
eprom. the point is, the language is only context-specific in terms of what
it is meant to handle, which is low level, granularity control of hardware
and circuitry. still, those examples fail to live up to what you're saying
since no assembly language i know of will only work a specific chipset, as
you say. they may have different contraints on features that can be used per
chipset or may require different compilers, however the comparison is like
PHP as CLI or CGI, etc..

as for javascript, yes, that is the origination but, like most other
burgeoning languages (PHP inclusive) they quickly outgrow the niche that
spurred their creation. case-in-point, perl.

but again, you do make a very good case that there are languages that do, in
fact, restrict themselves entirely to specific environments and
implementations. i just don't agree that these are the rule.
Well if you looks at things below the hood so to speak,you will find
that a huge amount of processing power is devoted to executing the
processor specific machine code. Far more than is probably used, across
all the microchips that are in use, than are used to compile C++..

You have to understand that I come from a hardware background, a huge
area that is complately unknown to most 'computer programmers' whose
life begins and ends with an interpreter or compiler..

btw, my original reply to you was shearly in jest. :) why not name your
language? hell, if i made one, i'd at least have fun with naming it.
It was only after I left that particular contract that I rtelised I had,
in fact, written a sort of interpreter for a sort of language.

At the time, it was just the simplest way of storing commend sequences,
with a little bit of branching/subroutine in it.

cheers.

Jul 10 '08 #66
In article <ER*************@newsfe02.lga>, "Barry" <no****@example.com>
wrote:
"Ivan Marsh" <iv*******@yahoo.comwrote in message
news:pa****************************@yahoo.com...
[snip]
I was not aware you can read minds. I apologize for questioning your
omniscience.

btw, aside from having reading comprehension skills, i also rarely
contradict myself...especially so daftly as to do it one sentence after
another...as in:

"I hadn't heard about this server side stuff either."

directly followed by:

"My JavaScript book mentions a couple of times in its intro that '...
JavaScript can even be run on a server ...'"

i hope you can appreciate my amusement on that one as well.
A sort of childish amusement, yes.
Jul 10 '08 #67

"Tim Streater" <ti**********@dante.org.ukwrote in message
news:ti********************************@news.indiv idual.net...
In article <ER*************@newsfe02.lga>, "Barry" <no****@example.com>
wrote:
>"Ivan Marsh" <iv*******@yahoo.comwrote in message
news:pa****************************@yahoo.com.. .

[snip]
I was not aware you can read minds. I apologize for questioning your
omniscience.

btw, aside from having reading comprehension skills, i also rarely
contradict myself...especially so daftly as to do it one sentence after
another...as in:

"I hadn't heard about this server side stuff either."

directly followed by:

"My JavaScript book mentions a couple of times in its intro that '...
JavaScript can even be run on a server ...'"

i hope you can appreciate my amusement on that one as well.

A sort of childish amusement, yes.
one quip returned in kind...it's only appropriate. :)
Jul 10 '08 #68
On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 22:35:40 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Ivan Marsh wrote:
>On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 16:49:01 -0400, John W Kennedy wrote:
>>Jerry Stuckle wrote:
Hint: javascript does NOT run on the server.
Actually, server JavaScript was the original language of the
HTML-embedded class now dominated by JSP, ASP, and PHP.

Since Javascript and PHP both originate in 1995 I'm not sure how you can
make that assertion.
Odd that ..I am sure we were running CGI based on scripts and PERL and C
earlier than that, too.
Indeed.

--
"Remain calm, we're here to protect you!"

Jul 10 '08 #69
On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 18:36:32 -0400, John W Kennedy wrote:
Ivan Marsh wrote:
>On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 16:49:01 -0400, John W Kennedy wrote:
>>Jerry Stuckle wrote:
Hint: javascript does NOT run on the server.
Actually, server JavaScript was the original language of the
HTML-embedded class now dominated by JSP, ASP, and PHP.

Since Javascript and PHP both originate in 1995 I'm not sure how you
can make that assertion.

I didn't know PHP was quite that old. In any case, in 1996, server-side
JavaScript was in the major server product from the then major player
(Netscape Enterprise Server 2.0), and PHP was a personal project.
So you're right because you're wrong?

LiveWire was a disaster and never became anywhere near popular, much less
an industry leader... and says nothing to support your original statement.

Server-side JavaScript was an idea that still has not matured in any
reasonable way.

--
"Remain calm, we're here to protect you!"

Jul 10 '08 #70
....
>
i didn't say money wasn't important. what i DID say was that
*shopping* around WAS. the logical inference is that money IS
important...otherwise, why shop at all! now simply answer my
question, what does 'what servers have it installed' have to do with
whether or not server-side javascript exists? as it does, i fail to
see how knowing what servers use it is germain.
>Now you're just being a troll. You won't answer the question
because YOU CAN'T. You can't because YOU'RE WRONG.

what am i wrong about jerry? that hosts will or won't install a
language interpreter on a server at the request of a customer? how
rediculous is that?!
>Go away, stoopid troll.

<plonk>

how am i trolling jerry? i'll answer your question if you simply give
me one good reason why it has anything to do with anything. you go
ahead and pretend someone is trying to goad you. fluff up those
feathers if it makes you feel good. just remember though, you spoke
out of turn and were called on it and, it's you who is choosing to
disengage...just because you can't even give a reason why you'd ask a
question that hardly relates to the topic at hand.

btw, stupid is spelled, well, s t u p i d.
Well, I have a bunch of my own opinions and it's interesting how you
guys managed to make a competitive length out of all this and didn't
really say anything relevant.

I personally waited for the answer to where js could be found installed
for use by the clients. It'd be nice to know.

Just for grins, I went out to a bunch of ISPs, mostly business server
types, and asked if they would/could provide "java script" for me to
use. The responses ran from black holes to outright refusals to polite
"No, never" and such. More than one indicated I was stupid for even
asking the question and two said they knew of no other servers which
would allow it.
I visited a few webmaster newsgroups and got laughed at there and the
majority of responses tried to talk me into a better language, etc..
They all said forget server side js.

In the end, my small, tiny bit of research uncovered no one willing to
even consider offering it for a plethora of varyious reasons, even with
their "supreme, do-all, nothing missed", pretty damned expensive
offerings/subscriptions.
I know I'll be crowned for not listing the sites, but it doesn't seem
to me that the ones that do not/will not offer js are the point; I was
seriously looking for those that would and found none. So ... which
ones DO/WILL provide it?
No, I'm not looking to use server side js; it's just that I thought
the question was interesting enough to deserve a response and might be
useful info for some folk here at the same time. Groups are suppsedly
for sharing information and ... .
So ... which ones do provide server side js?

Cheers,

Twayne


Jul 10 '08 #71
Message-ID: <wWrdk.1188$Ae3.825@trnddc05from Twayne contained the
following:
I know I'll be crowned for not listing the sites, but it doesn't seem
to me that the ones that do not/will not offer js are the point; I was
seriously looking for those that would and found none. So ... which
ones DO/WILL provide it?
I've not really been following the thread other than the first few posts
but I don't think anyone would realistically expect it to be a provided
service. But if you have your own VPS or dedicated server I guess you
could have what you want. And they aren't /that/ expensive.

--
Geoff Berrow 0110001001101100010000000110
001101101011011001000110111101100111001011
100110001101101111001011100111010101101011
Jul 10 '08 #72

"Twayne" <no****@devnull.spamcop.netwrote in message
news:wWrdk.1188$Ae3.825@trnddc05...
...
>>
i didn't say money wasn't important. what i DID say was that
*shopping* around WAS. the logical inference is that money IS
important...otherwise, why shop at all! now simply answer my
question, what does 'what servers have it installed' have to do with
whether or not server-side javascript exists? as it does, i fail to
see how knowing what servers use it is germain.
>>Now you're just being a troll. You won't answer the question
because YOU CAN'T. You can't because YOU'RE WRONG.

what am i wrong about jerry? that hosts will or won't install a
language interpreter on a server at the request of a customer? how
rediculous is that?!
>>Go away, stoopid troll.

<plonk>

how am i trolling jerry? i'll answer your question if you simply give
me one good reason why it has anything to do with anything. you go
ahead and pretend someone is trying to goad you. fluff up those
feathers if it makes you feel good. just remember though, you spoke
out of turn and were called on it and, it's you who is choosing to
disengage...just because you can't even give a reason why you'd ask a
question that hardly relates to the topic at hand.

btw, stupid is spelled, well, s t u p i d.

Well, I have a bunch of my own opinions and it's interesting how you guys
managed to make a competitive length out of all this and didn't really say
anything relevant.

I personally waited for the answer to where js could be found installed
for use by the clients. It'd be nice to know.

Just for grins, I went out to a bunch of ISPs, mostly business server
types, and asked if they would/could provide "java script" for me to use.
The responses ran from black holes to outright refusals to polite "No,
never" and such. More than one indicated I was stupid for even asking the
question and two said they knew of no other servers which would allow it.
I visited a few webmaster newsgroups and got laughed at there and the
majority of responses tried to talk me into a better language, etc.. They
all said forget server side js.

In the end, my small, tiny bit of research uncovered no one willing to
even consider offering it for a plethora of varyious reasons, even with
their "supreme, do-all, nothing missed", pretty damned expensive
offerings/subscriptions.
I know I'll be crowned for not listing the sites, but it doesn't seem to
me that the ones that do not/will not offer js are the point; I was
seriously looking for those that would and found none. So ... which ones
DO/WILL provide it?
No, I'm not looking to use server side js; it's just that I thought the
question was interesting enough to deserve a response and might be useful
info for some folk here at the same time. Groups are suppsedly for
sharing information and ... .
So ... which ones do provide server side js?
hey twayne.

i never expected jerry to tell me why he would ask the question. while i
would like to know myself, my point has been that it had nothing to do with
the OP's question. jerry was simply wrong about javascript being
client-only. he offered a diversion in the form of this question to derail
the glaring oversite. when that diversion was questioned as irrelevant, he
simply used his typical 'troll' + 'stoopid' + 'plonk' modus...after trying
two other diversions to the original diversion in question (btw, those were
'a personal install doesn't count - not reliable' and 'doing it via a host
is expensive'). i simply kept bringing him back to task. since he never
responded as to why he'd ask who provides ss-js, obviously nothing ever
really came in the way of content.

on another note, i was interested too. for a couple of my comercial sites, i
use a well-known host (it's enough for me to know, i don't need jerry to
call them and ask so that i can feel vendicated...he wouldn't reply back
anyway since he'd be wrong...again). i pay - my clients, actually - for a
server of my own and can configure it as i wish...inclusive of whatever
packages i'd like. there is no extra charge - and i did check - for
installing ss-js. and, being professionals, they both knew what i was
talking about and did not laugh. they wanted to know how to maintain what i
wanted to install and would only decline if there were significant security
risks to other systems they have in place.

i'm all for sharing information, however that was NOT jerry's intent when
posing the question. answering it simply means he got some to divert their
attention away from a misgiving he emphatically and repeatedly declared. if
you don't think so, then ponder the lack of response to or acknowledgement
of the mention of Netscape's Enterprise Server. he's just not after a
specific answer to the question, any and multiple answers are what he wants.
they are more opportunities for diversion.

as it is, i'd never use ss-js and wouldn't expect most hosts to bother
installing it, even on request...unless they charged a bunch o' cash to
endulge our bad decision making. ;^)

cheers.
Jul 10 '08 #73
Barry wrote:
"John W Kennedy" <jw*****@attglobal.netwrote in message
news:48**********************@cv.net...
>The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>Javshite was designed - if that isn't too strong a word - to make
browsers do tricks.

It wasn;t origally deigned as a general purpose language at all.
Netscape released both Netscape Navigator 2.0, with JavaScript in the
client, and Netscape Enterprise Server 2.0, with JavaScript in a PHP-like
role, in March, 1996.

yes john, but he means to prove the statement wrong that languages are
developed without context and implementation in mind. he is correct that js
was originally developed for the browser - strictly. whatever use we have of
it today is beside his having proved his argument correct.
How do we /know/ that, given that its first official release had both
browser and server functions, and given that the language is carefully
designed with a clean interface to an unspecified environment, so that
it needs no alliance to the web at all (for example, it has been used as
the macro language for text editors)?

--
John W. Kennedy
"Compact is becoming contract,
Man only earns and pays."
-- Charles Williams. "Bors to Elayne: On the King's Coins"
Jul 10 '08 #74
Barry wrote:
"John W Kennedy" <jw*****@attglobal.netwrote in message
news:48**********************@cv.net...
>Ivan Marsh wrote:
>>On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 16:49:01 -0400, John W Kennedy wrote:

Jerry Stuckle wrote:
Hint: javascript does NOT run on the server.
Actually, server JavaScript was the original language of the
HTML-embedded class now dominated by JSP, ASP, and PHP.
Since Javascript and PHP both originate in 1995 I'm not sure how you can
make that assertion.
I didn't know PHP was quite that old. In any case, in 1996, server-side
JavaScript was in the major server product from the then major player
(Netscape Enterprise Server 2.0), and PHP was a personal project.

which could be the case in 1996, however in 1995 js was client-side.
And, to the best of my knowledge, still in beta. When it was /released/,
Netscape provided it as both a web-client DOM engine and as a PHP-like
HTML-embedded web-server script engine.
--
John W. Kennedy
If Bill Gates believes in "intelligent design", why can't he apply it
to Windows?
Jul 10 '08 #75
On Jul 10, 10:47*am, "Twayne" <nob...@devnull.spamcop.netwrote:
* So ... which ones do provide server side js?
Java 6 includes a JavaScript interpreter, so any host which runs Java
6 also likely provides server-side JS.
Jul 10 '08 #76

<vo****@gmail.comwrote in message
news:45**********************************@k37g2000 hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 10, 10:47 am, "Twayne" <nob...@devnull.spamcop.netwrote:
>So ... which ones do provide server side js?
>Java 6 includes a JavaScript interpreter, so any host which runs Java
6 also likely provides server-side JS.
lest we forget that all it takes to setup a jsp server in IIS is the check
of a box. ;^)
Jul 11 '08 #77

"John W Kennedy" <jw*****@attglobal.netwrote in message
news:48**********************@cv.net...
Barry wrote:
>"John W Kennedy" <jw*****@attglobal.netwrote in message
news:48**********************@cv.net...
>>The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Javshite was designed - if that isn't too strong a word - to make
browsers do tricks.

It wasn;t origally deigned as a general purpose language at all.
Netscape released both Netscape Navigator 2.0, with JavaScript in the
client, and Netscape Enterprise Server 2.0, with JavaScript in a
PHP-like role, in March, 1996.

yes john, but he means to prove the statement wrong that languages are
developed without context and implementation in mind. he is correct that
js was originally developed for the browser - strictly. whatever use we
have of it today is beside his having proved his argument correct.

How do we /know/ that, given that its first official release had both
browser and server functions, and given that the language is carefully
designed with a clean interface to an unspecified environment, so that it
needs no alliance to the web at all (for example, it has been used as the
macro language for text editors)?
i would assume that a review of it's origination would help...i mean, read
about the gentlement that came up with it and what their intent was. from
what i recall, they had a specific context in mind, i.e. the browser. i
really, personally, couldn't care less. i simply commented to point out that
1996 was NOT the origin of js, so whatever followed from that argument was
an irrelevant counter. your review and submission of finding related to the
origin of js, as i just described, would be a crushing counter or correction
for you.

cheers.
Jul 11 '08 #78

"John W Kennedy" <jw*****@attglobal.netwrote in message
news:48**********************@cv.net...
Barry wrote:
>"John W Kennedy" <jw*****@attglobal.netwrote in message
news:48**********************@cv.net...
>>Ivan Marsh wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 16:49:01 -0400, John W Kennedy wrote:

Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>Hint: javascript does NOT run on the server.
Actually, server JavaScript was the original language of the
HTML-embedded class now dominated by JSP, ASP, and PHP.
Since Javascript and PHP both originate in 1995 I'm not sure how you
can
make that assertion.
I didn't know PHP was quite that old. In any case, in 1996, server-side
JavaScript was in the major server product from the then major player
(Netscape Enterprise Server 2.0), and PHP was a personal project.

which could be the case in 1996, however in 1995 js was client-side.

And, to the best of my knowledge, still in beta. When it was /released/,
Netscape provided it as both a web-client DOM engine and as a PHP-like
HTML-embedded web-server script engine.
which is beside the point. since js was NOT conceived in 1996, you cannot
say what the *original* context was - the intent of its authors. is that a
bit clearer? what coding project does NOT quickly scope creep once it is
birthed? virtually none. all of the ss-js may have been added after cs-js
was conceived. logically, we can't infer here based on it's non-beta,
initial release date.

i'd rather counter with a cite from one of the original js language
authors...like, 'this is why we created js...'. all else is speculation.
Jul 11 '08 #79

"Barry" <no****@example.comwrote in message
news:AI*************@newsfe05.lga...
>
"John W Kennedy" <jw*****@attglobal.netwrote in message
news:48**********************@cv.net...
>Barry wrote:
>>"John W Kennedy" <jw*****@attglobal.netwrote in message
news:48**********************@cv.net...
Ivan Marsh wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 16:49:01 -0400, John W Kennedy wrote:
>
>Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>Hint: javascript does NOT run on the server.
>Actually, server JavaScript was the original language of the
>HTML-embedded class now dominated by JSP, ASP, and PHP.
Since Javascript and PHP both originate in 1995 I'm not sure how you
can
make that assertion.
I didn't know PHP was quite that old. In any case, in 1996, server-side
JavaScript was in the major server product from the then major player
(Netscape Enterprise Server 2.0), and PHP was a personal project.

which could be the case in 1996, however in 1995 js was client-side.

And, to the best of my knowledge, still in beta. When it was /released/,
Netscape provided it as both a web-client DOM engine and as a PHP-like
HTML-embedded web-server script engine.

which is beside the point. since js was NOT conceived in 1996, you cannot
say what the *original* context was - the intent of its authors. is that a
bit clearer? what coding project does NOT quickly scope creep once it is
birthed? virtually none. all of the ss-js may have been added after cs-js
was conceived. logically, we can't infer here based on it's non-beta,
initial release date.

i'd rather counter with a cite from one of the original js language
authors...like, 'this is why we created js...'. all else is speculation.
or, how about the first page of this:

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/java...s_history.html

for a start? ;)
Jul 11 '08 #80
Barry wrote:
"John W Kennedy" <jw*****@attglobal.netwrote in message
news:48**********************@cv.net...
>Barry wrote:
>>"John W Kennedy" <jw*****@attglobal.netwrote in message
news:48**********************@cv.net...
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Javshite was designed - if that isn't too strong a word - to make
browsers do tricks.
>
It wasn;t origally deigned as a general purpose language at all.
Netscape released both Netscape Navigator 2.0, with JavaScript in the
client, and Netscape Enterprise Server 2.0, with JavaScript in a
PHP-like role, in March, 1996.
yes john, but he means to prove the statement wrong that languages are
developed without context and implementation in mind. he is correct that
js was originally developed for the browser - strictly. whatever use we
have of it today is beside his having proved his argument correct.
How do we /know/ that, given that its first official release had both
browser and server functions, and given that the language is carefully
designed with a clean interface to an unspecified environment, so that it
needs no alliance to the web at all (for example, it has been used as the
macro language for text editors)?

i would assume that a review of it's origination would help...i mean, read
about the gentlement that came up with it and what their intent was. from
what i recall, they had a specific context in mind, i.e. the browser.
The original idea of the language is not the design of the language. In
over 40 years in this game, I have never seen a pre-1.0 language
specification that was not significantly different from what shipped.
And the top-level-object strategy strongly suggests that, by the time
JavaScript 1.0 was nailed down, it was already intended for multiple
environments.
i
really, personally, couldn't care less. i simply commented to point out that
1996 was NOT the origin of js, so whatever followed from that argument was
an irrelevant counter.
According to my information, it was in beta until 1996. The official
releases in that year are all I have found dates for, and in the
official releases, client-side and server-side came out together.
--
John W. Kennedy
"When a man contemplates forcing his own convictions down another
man's throat, he is contemplating both an unchristian act and an act of
treason to the United States."
-- Joy Davidman, "Smoke on the Mountain"
Jul 11 '08 #81

"John W Kennedy" <jw*****@attglobal.netwrote in message
news:48***********************@cv.net...
Barry wrote:
>"John W Kennedy" <jw*****@attglobal.netwrote in message
news:48**********************@cv.net...
>>Barry wrote:
"John W Kennedy" <jw*****@attglobal.netwrote in message
news:48**********************@cv.net...
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>Javshite was designed - if that isn't too strong a word - to make
>browsers do tricks.
>>
>It wasn;t origally deigned as a general purpose language at all.
Netscape released both Netscape Navigator 2.0, with JavaScript in the
client, and Netscape Enterprise Server 2.0, with JavaScript in a
PHP-like role, in March, 1996.
yes john, but he means to prove the statement wrong that languages are
developed without context and implementation in mind. he is correct
that js was originally developed for the browser - strictly. whatever
use we have of it today is beside his having proved his argument
correct.
How do we /know/ that, given that its first official release had both
browser and server functions, and given that the language is carefully
designed with a clean interface to an unspecified environment, so that
it needs no alliance to the web at all (for example, it has been used as
the macro language for text editors)?

i would assume that a review of it's origination would help...i mean,
read about the gentlement that came up with it and what their intent was.
from what i recall, they had a specific context in mind, i.e. the
browser.

The original idea of the language is not the design of the language. In
over 40 years in this game, I have never seen a pre-1.0 language
specification that was not significantly different from what shipped. And
the top-level-object strategy strongly suggests that, by the time
JavaScript 1.0 was nailed down, it was already intended for multiple
environments.
that's reasonable. it would strongly appear though, given the reading of the
history, that js was meant to sugar-coat/dummy-down java so that lesser
programmers could consume java applets that ran in the browser. probably
during its initial development, it may well be that they said let's throw in
ss-js too. who knows on that one.

as for your opening comment on the idea of the language. well that's more
'no' than 'yes'. you can be assured that the development of the language
will first seek to fill the requirements of 'the original idea'. usually for
any language or program, it's not until that begins to be fulfilled that
other features are implemented. so, the original idea sets the context meant
to be handled starting with the first line of code written.

what's interesting to note is that it is entirely plausible that the context
itself changes based on what new feature are added. i think the start of
this little overture was the notion that languages are created with a
context in mind. i'd agree with that as it applies to 4GL rather than
low-level assembly - but to some extent there as well. through the
development of js, whether cs-js or ss-js, there has always been a context,
a frame in which the language is meant to paint the picture.

understand that i'm not taking issue with your claim that js was designed to
be a general purpose language - to be technically correct, it was meant to
be a wrapper for a general purpose language, java. what i am saying is that
even general purpose languages are developed with a context in mind. your
example merely demonstrates that js seems to be web related having both
client and server functionality...the context would be the service of http
content to a consumer. still insufficient as a counter.
>i really, personally, couldn't care less. i simply commented to point out
that 1996 was NOT the origin of js, so whatever followed from that
argument was an irrelevant counter.

According to my information, it was in beta until 1996. The official
releases in that year are all I have found dates for, and in the official
releases, client-side and server-side came out together.
it may well be. the context for js would seem to only expand it's context
from client/browser functionality to client and server - the context of http
content processing - if that is the actual case. thus, js is still framed in
a context throughout its development cycles starting in '95. both phil and i
could be wrong about the initial intent of js being to make browsers do
tricks, however that was not the end point argument...phil's statement was
meant to be proof that languages are developed with context in mind.

good points though.

cheers
Jul 11 '08 #82
Barry wrote:
i would think from a business stand-point that if server-sided js was as
capable and robust as php or asp that using one language in the company's
web development would be a huge, pragmatic plus. imo, ss-js simply isn't
there yet nor is there a developer-based demand for it to be in the near
future.

cheers
You might also have bet on beta-max as being the better than vhs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta-max

the best is not always what succeeds.
Cheers.
Jul 12 '08 #83
Johnny wrote:
Barry wrote:
>i would think from a business stand-point that if server-sided js was
as capable and robust as php or asp that using one language in the
company's web development would be a huge, pragmatic plus. imo, ss-js
simply isn't there yet nor is there a developer-based demand for it to
be in the near future.

cheers
You might also have bet on beta-max as being the better than vhs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta-max

the best is not always what succeeds.
Cheers.
In the case of javascript that is axiomatic ;-)
Jul 12 '08 #84

"The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.cwrote in message
news:12****************@proxy02.news.clara.net...
Johnny wrote:
>Barry wrote:
>>i would think from a business stand-point that if server-sided js was as
capable and robust as php or asp that using one language in the
company's web development would be a huge, pragmatic plus. imo, ss-js
simply isn't there yet nor is there a developer-based demand for it to
be in the near future.

cheers
You might also have bet on beta-max as being the better than vhs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta-max

the best is not always what succeeds.
Cheers.
In the case of javascript that is axiomatic ;-)
lol.
Jul 14 '08 #85

This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion.

Similar topics

17
by: lawrence | last post by:
How is it possible that the question "How do I detect which browser the user has" is missing from this FAQ: http://www.faqts.com/knowledge_base/index.phtml/fid/125 and is only here on this...
0
by: DolphinDB | last post by:
Tired of spending countless mintues downsampling your data? Look no further! In this article, you’ll learn how to efficiently downsample 6.48 billion high-frequency records to 61 million...
1
isladogs
by: isladogs | last post by:
The next Access Europe meeting will be on Wednesday 6 Mar 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC) and finishing at about 19:15 (7.15PM). In this month's session, we are pleased to welcome back...
0
by: Vimpel783 | last post by:
Hello! Guys, I found this code on the Internet, but I need to modify it a little. It works well, the problem is this: Data is sent from only one cell, in this case B5, but it is necessary that data...
1
by: PapaRatzi | last post by:
Hello, I am teaching myself MS Access forms design and Visual Basic. I've created a table to capture a list of Top 30 singles and forms to capture new entries. The final step is a form (unbound)...
1
by: Defcon1945 | last post by:
I'm trying to learn Python using Pycharm but import shutil doesn't work
1
by: Shællîpôpï 09 | last post by:
If u are using a keypad phone, how do u turn on JavaScript, to access features like WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram....
0
by: af34tf | last post by:
Hi Guys, I have a domain whose name is BytesLimited.com, and I want to sell it. Does anyone know about platforms that allow me to list my domain in auction for free. Thank you
0
by: Faith0G | last post by:
I am starting a new it consulting business and it's been a while since I setup a new website. Is wordpress still the best web based software for hosting a 5 page website? The webpages will be...
0
isladogs
by: isladogs | last post by:
The next Access Europe User Group meeting will be on Wednesday 3 Apr 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC+1) and finishing by 19:30 (7.30PM). In this session, we are pleased to welcome former...

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.