Javascript form validation - comments please

[Stephen Poley]

Hmm. I am using Opera 7.23 on an Athlon XP 2something. I have also checked
with the Mozillas and MSIE in WinXP (same machine). Always the CPU load
goes up. Try running a CPU load monitor and yours should too.
Alternatively, make a test page without the static bg and put them side by
side, scroll each and you might notice the static bg page is slightly less
smooth (depending on your CPU, of course). I've heard it reported that it
does it on all browsers.

I did make a test page as you suggested, but I couldn't see any
difference to the smoothness of scrolling. The CPU load went up to 100%
in both cases. I'm using Opera 7.21.

Not sure what my CPU is, but it was the slowest [1] I could find when I
bought it just under 18 months ago.

[1] OK, cheapest.

 

[Toby A Inkster]

If you got a version that will run at a Win98 DOS prompt, what was the
URL you got it from?

No, I have a version that runs from the Linux tcsh prompt.

 

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

My feeling is that if an error can only be triggered by an *authoring*
mistake (such as mistyping an id) then it's probably better to let it
trigger a Javascript error which tells the author where to look, rather
than have it do nothing and leave one scratching ones head.

The problem is that JavaScript errors are not always visibly announced,
so if you want to make sure that authors see their mistakes, you need
to use alert(...).

BTW please stop crossposting, this ha[ds] nothing to do with HTML anymore.


F'up2 cljs

PointedEars

 

[Vigil]

Odd that it should go up to 100% on a 'normal' (no static bg) page...

 

[Dr John Stockton]

JRS: In article <[email protected]>, seen in
Toby A Inkster <UseTheAddressInMySig@deadspam
..com> posted at Wed, 10 Dec 2003 07:25:09 :-

No, I have a version that runs from the Linux tcsh prompt.

In that case, there is not necessarily a later DOS-32 compilation;
though the equivalent to what you have ought to be available to me.