New jQuery announced!
in [JavaScript]
|
From: David Mark on 15 Dec 2009 12:27 On Dec 15, 12:12 pm, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote: [...] > > All ridiculous. Adding those two alias isn't going to break anything. > An addendum, it's OT, but why the hell aren't those two cell* attributes deprecated? Thinking back, I'm sure I thought they were (or should have been). They seem strictly decorative to me (and covered by CSS rules). I know I haven't used them since last century.
From: Garrett Smith on 16 Dec 2009 20:25 David Mark wrote: > On Dec 15, 11:03 am, Matt Kruse <m...(a)thekrusefamily.com> wrote: > [].]]] > That's a silly omission by one person from two years ago. Sometimes less is more. For example, my dom attributes/property wrapper source code:- | - 0 SLOC and no bugs whatsoever. :-D -- Garrett comp.lang.javascript FAQ: http://jibbering.com/faq/
From: David Mark on 17 Dec 2009 09:35 On Dec 16, 8:25 pm, Garrett Smith <dhtmlkitc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > David Mark wrote: > > On Dec 15, 11:03 am, Matt Kruse <m...(a)thekrusefamily.com> wrote: > > [].]]] > > > That's a silly omission by one person from two years ago. > > Sometimes less is more. For example, my dom attributes/property wrapper > source code:- > > | > > - 0 SLOC and no bugs whatsoever. I'm sure your time machine has never broken down either. ;)
From: John G Harris on 17 Dec 2009 10:12 On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 at 17:25:33, in comp.lang.javascript, Garrett Smith wrote: <snip> >- 0 SLOC and no bugs whatsoever. How can you be sure your test code had no bugs in it ? John -- John Harris
From: David Mark on 17 Dec 2009 10:37
On Dec 17, 10:12 am, John G Harris <j...(a)nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote: > On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 at 17:25:33, in comp.lang.javascript, Garrett Smith > wrote: > > <snip> > > >- 0 SLOC and no bugs whatsoever. > > How can you be sure your test code had no bugs in it ? > ISTM you would need imaginary test code for a non-existent wrapper. :) |