setTimeout only delays first time in loop

Discussion in 'Javascript' started by barry@polisource.com, Sep 13, 2006.

  1. Guest

    I'm having a problem creating a delay before each list item gets moved
    ( http://www.polisource.com/PublicMisc/list-splitter-timeout-bug.html
    ). Choose any number of columns, vertical layout, and view as a web
    page. They'll be a small delay before the entire bunch of list items
    converts from left-to-right to top-to-bottom order. I expected a delay
    before each item is moved. It looks like I have to flush the buffer to
    get setTimeout to work, but I don't think there's a built-in flush
    function in Javascript anymore. Or else setTimeout only delays the
    function it calls the first time it's called and subsequently calls the
    function with no delay. In this script I have:

    setTimeout("funtest(" + li_count + "," + pos_change_left + "," +
    pos_change_top + ")",700);

    which calls:

    function funtest(aaa,bbb,ccc)
    {
    var li = $('mylist').getElementsByTagName('LI');
    li[aaa].style.position = 'relative';
    li[aaa].style.left = bbb + 'px';
    li[aaa].style.top = ccc + 'px';
    }

    once for each li that's moved (20 of them), but there's only one delay,
    then they're all moved. If I put an alert in the function, it's
    triggered 20 times, once before every change in position of a li, so
    why aren't there 20 delays (one before each move) instead of just one?
     
    , Sep 13, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Erwin Moller Guest

    wrote:

    > I'm having a problem creating a delay before each list item gets moved
    > ( http://www.polisource.com/PublicMisc/list-splitter-timeout-bug.html
    > ). Choose any number of columns, vertical layout, and view as a web
    > page. They'll be a small delay before the entire bunch of list items
    > converts from left-to-right to top-to-bottom order. I expected a delay
    > before each item is moved. It looks like I have to flush the buffer to
    > get setTimeout to work, but I don't think there's a built-in flush
    > function in Javascript anymore. Or else setTimeout only delays the
    > function it calls the first time it's called and subsequently calls the
    > function with no delay. In this script I have:
    >
    > setTimeout("funtest(" + li_count + "," + pos_change_left + "," +
    > pos_change_top + ")",700);
    >
    > which calls:
    >
    > function funtest(aaa,bbb,ccc)
    > {
    > var li = $('mylist').getElementsByTagName('LI');
    > li[aaa].style.position = 'relative';
    > li[aaa].style.left = bbb + 'px';
    > li[aaa].style.top = ccc + 'px';
    > }
    >
    > once for each li that's moved (20 of them), but there's only one delay,
    > then they're all moved. If I put an alert in the function, it's
    > triggered 20 times, once before every change in position of a li, so
    > why aren't there 20 delays (one before each move) instead of just one?


    Hi,

    Not my area of expertise, but I think I heard somebody in here say before
    that all stylesheet-updates are executed when the JS-function returns.
    Has something to do with 1 thread for javascript, but I am not sure.

    It has nothing to do with 'flushing a buffer'. Which buffer?

    And if you want them to move one after each other, give the next setTimeOut
    from within the excuting function (funtest in this case).
    Or make sure all setTimeout calls have an increasing interval.
    Like this:
    setTimeout("funtest('bla','bla','bluh')",700);
    setTimeout("funtest('bla','bla2','bluh')",1400);
    etc.

    I cannot see by your code where and how the setTimeOut is implemented right
    now.

    Regards,
    Erwin Moller
     
    Erwin Moller, Sep 13, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Guest

    Thanks guys. I incremented the delay for each iteration and it worked.

    Jim Davis wrote:

    > The key is going to be how you're calling that timeout. My guess is you've
    > put it in a loop and set 20 timeouts - think about it: of course they'd all
    > move at the same time (or very close) since you're setting them all at once.
    > ;^)


    I'm not sure I understand how the script is executed for it to work the
    way it does. The way I figured, my original timeout said "delay 700ms,
    then execute the named function (funtest)," then after funtest is
    executed (which changes the position of a single li element), the
    statement after the timeout is executed, which is within the same loop
    of the timeout, and the loop would cause the timeout to be executed
    again, causing another 700ms delay before another li changes position.

    But as far as I could tell, you're saying that Javascript sees the
    delay the first time, delays 700ms, then thinks "ok, I delayed 700ms
    before funtest, and even if I encounter the 700ms timeout 19 more
    times, that job was done so I don't have to delay again, but I still
    have to execute funtest each time."

    Anyone know of any online documentation for setTimeout that makes it
    clear that the latter is the way it works rather than the former, or is
    there a problem with my logic?
     
    , Sep 13, 2006
    #3
  4. Guest

    I received a response from TheBearMay at
    http://www.webdeveloper.com/forum/showthread.php?p=637609 that
    clarified things for me. "SetTimeout is not a thread delay, but a
    function to run a command after a delay; i.e. it doesn't stop thread
    execution, but spawns another thread on a time delay." That explains
    the behavior. I hadn't read that anywhere. I guess someone learning
    Javascript should buy a book. Some important information is missing
    from the online documentation I've seen.
     
    , Sep 14, 2006
    #4
  5. JRS: In article <>,
    dated Wed, 13 Sep 2006 10:29:22 remote, seen in
    news:comp.lang.javascript, posted :

    >But as far as I could tell, you're saying that Javascript sees the
    >delay the first time, delays 700ms, then thinks "ok, I delayed 700ms
    >before funtest, and even if I encounter the 700ms timeout 19 more
    >times, that job was done so I don't have to delay again, but I still
    >have to execute funtest each time."
    >
    >Anyone know of any online documentation for setTimeout that makes it
    >clear that the latter is the way it works rather than the former, or is
    >there a problem with my logic?


    The latter.

    All sound Javascript references, except the most condensed, indicate
    that setTimeout causes the given code to be started after (at least) the
    given delay, and do not say that the current thread of execution stops
    for that delay.

    Example :
    setTimeout Evaluates an expression or calls a function once after a
    specified number of milliseconds has elapsed.
    ...
    setTimeout does not stall the script. The script
    continues immediately (not waiting for the timeout to
    expire). The call simply schedules a future event.


    Newsgroup FAQ 4.20 is also clear enough.

    The FAQ is cited daily in the newsgroup, and you should have read it
    before posting.

    It's a good idea to read the newsgroup and its FAQ.
    --
    © John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 IE 4 ©
    <URL:http://www.jibbering.com/faq/>? JL/RC: FAQ of news:comp.lang.javascript
    <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/js-index.htm> jscr maths, dates, sources.
    <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> TP/BP/Delphi/jscr/&c, FAQ items, links.
     
    Dr John Stockton, Sep 14, 2006
    #5
  6. Guest

    Dr John Stockton wrote:
    > The FAQ is cited daily in the newsgroup, and you should have read it
    > before posting.
    >
    > It's a good idea to read the newsgroup and its FAQ.


    I access this group through Google Groups and didn't see anything about
    a FAQ, though I didn't read any posts. Just now I looked at the second
    page of post titles and I saw " FAQ Topic - How do I modify the current
    browser window?" I wouldn't have clicked that if I saw it before. When
    I post to a newsgroup, I just check whether there's too much spam
    before I post, and I always do my own research first if I think there's
    any chance of finding the answer. I read several online Javascript
    references and saw nothing like what you quoted that mentioned
    threading.

    Can't the Javascript developers just make a regular sleep function that
    doesn't thread?
     
    , Sep 18, 2006
    #6
  7. JRS: In article <>,
    dated Mon, 18 Sep 2006 10:09:17 remote, seen in
    news:comp.lang.javascript, posted :
    >Dr John Stockton wrote:
    >> The FAQ is cited daily in the newsgroup, and you should have read it
    >> before posting.
    >>
    >> It's a good idea to read the newsgroup and its FAQ.

    >
    >I access this group through Google Groups and didn't see anything about
    >a FAQ, though I didn't read any posts.


    You are naive and rude. A normal person does not, in outside life,
    contribute to a discussion without listening for a while first. Looking
    at Subjects is inadequate.

    > Just now I looked at the second
    >page of post titles and I saw " FAQ Topic - How do I modify the current
    >browser window?" I wouldn't have clicked that if I saw it before. When
    >I post to a newsgroup, I just check whether there's too much spam
    >before I post, and I always do my own research first if I think there's
    >any chance of finding the answer.


    Your research must have been sadly limited if you have not come across
    the concept of "FAQ" before - perhaps this is your first venture into
    technical newsgroups.

    > I read several online Javascript
    >references and saw nothing like what you quoted that mentioned
    >threading.


    Perhaps you do not understand the distinction between an authoritative
    reference and an amateurish effort?

    >Can't the Javascript developers just make a regular sleep function that
    >doesn't thread?


    Of course they can. But it would be entirely unnecessary. If you want
    an efficient delay, just call setTimeout when the present thread is
    finished, and give it the new code; adapt your mode of thinking to the
    environment.

    If you want an inefficient machine-hogging one, just write a trivial
    wait-loop using new Date(), such as
    for (D = +new Date()+3000 ; +new Date() < D ; ) ; // Delay(3000)
    but don't be so silly as to put it on a Web page.

    It's a good idea to read the newsgroup and its FAQ.
    --
    © John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 IE 4 ©
    <URL:http://www.jibbering.com/faq/>? JL/RC: FAQ of news:comp.lang.javascript
    <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/js-index.htm> jscr maths, dates, sources.
    <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> TP/BP/Delphi/jscr/&c, FAQ items, links.
     
    Dr John Stockton, Sep 19, 2006
    #7
  8. Guest

    Dr John Stockton wrote:
    > You are naive and rude. A normal person does not, in outside life,
    > contribute to a discussion without listening for a while first. Looking
    > at Subjects is inadequate.


    You're the one who's naive and rude. In addition, despite your
    expertise, this newsgroup would be better off without you. I appreciate
    the help of someone knowledgeable just like everyone else, but not if
    it means allowing someone as rude as you to get an ego boost from it
    and help publicize his website in his signature. I'd rather put in the
    extra effort to find a solution from another source or another member
    of the newsgroup than to have myself and others have to deal with
    people with sticks up their ass like you. Nobody "in outside life" who
    makes comments like yours should expect to get far in a civilized
    society unless they have a lot of money. If you don't change your
    manner, you better hope that whatever clique is putting up with your
    crap never goes away.


    Dr John Stockton wrote:
    > Your research must have been sadly limited if you have not come across
    > the concept of "FAQ" before - perhaps this is your first venture into
    > technical newsgroups.

    ....
    > Perhaps you do not understand the distinction between an authoritative
    > reference and an amateurish effort?


    My research included many carefully formed search engine queries and
    visits to popular Javascript webpages that I've bookmarked over the
    years. In a prior post to this thread (
    http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/msg/582346180439e99e
    ) I said "I received a response from TheBearMay at
    http://www.webdeveloper.com/forum/showthread.php?p=637609 that
    clarified things for me." If you read the response, you'll see that
    TheBearMay (a Super Moderator) informed me about the threads used in
    setTimeout and recommended three webpages for additional reading on the
    topic, some of which I'd previously seen. I responded to him saying
    "none of the links you provided or any of the other pages I've read say
    anything like that." With all the research I did and all the pages
    specifically on setTimeout that I read, I'm right to complain about the
    lack of decent online documentation for Javascript. I had noticed this
    for years.


    Dr John Stockton wrote:
    > Your research must have been sadly limited if you have not come across
    > the concept of "FAQ" before - perhaps this is your first venture into
    > technical newsgroups.


    Perhaps you should stop assuming things that you have no way of
    knowing, especially when it takes the form of an insult. The reason I
    wouldn't have clicked "FAQ Topic - How do I modify the current browser
    window?" if I had looked that far down the subject titles is...and I
    thought this was obvious...because the title clearly has nothing to do
    with my question. As I said, "I access this group through Google Groups
    and didn't see anything about
    a FAQ."

    The subject of this newsgroup and of the posts makes it obvious that my
    question was appropriate, especially after the effort I took to find
    the answer. I guess you feel I should have concentrated that effort on
    this newsgroup. It's true that in that case I might have come across
    your signature with the link to your FAQ in which the answer I sought
    is buried. I hope it doesn't offend you that I searched a wider data
    set than that. No, actually I hope you are offended.


    > >Can't the Javascript developers just make a regular sleep function that
    > >doesn't thread?

    >
    > Of course they can. But it would be entirely unnecessary. If you want
    > an efficient delay, just call setTimeout when the present thread is
    > finished, and give it the new code; adapt your mode of thinking to the
    > environment.


    As someone mentioned earlier in this thread, "The second option (and,
    if I'm correct that you've place the timeout in a
    loop then probably the easier one for you) is to stagger the timeouts."
    Yes, much easier. I wrote my script in the most intuitive way for me,
    and I would have appreciated a plain old delay with no threading and
    not having to figure out how to adapt my code. Increasing the delay by
    the amount of the original delay for each iteration isn't such an
    obvious solution even if you know about the threading. KISS.


    > If you want an inefficient machine-hogging one, just write a trivial
    > wait-loop using new Date(), such as
    > for (D = +new Date()+3000 ; +new Date() < D ; ) ; // Delay(3000)


    No thanks.


    > It's a good idea to read the newsgroup and its FAQ.


    You never told me where this FAQ exists. You mean the link in your
    signature?

    Feel free to consider all question rhetorical and not to respond.
     
    , Sep 20, 2006
    #8
  9. JRS: In article <>,
    dated Tue, 19 Sep 2006 17:14:10 remote, seen in
    news:comp.lang.javascript, posted :

    > ...
    >and help publicize his website in his signature.
    > ...


    And why not? IMHO, the site is useful only if people read it, and for
    that they need to know that it exists. But perhaps you think that I get
    financial gain from people reading it? If so, you have a very sordidly
    mercenary attitude.

    >> It's a good idea to read the newsgroup and its FAQ.

    >
    >You never told me where this FAQ exists. You mean the link in your
    >signature?


    I require, but fortunately do not presume, a modicum of intelligence in
    my readers.

    You are a windbag.

    It's a good idea to read the newsgroup and its FAQ.
    --
    © John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 IE 4 ©
    <URL:http://www.jibbering.com/faq/>? JL/RC: FAQ of news:comp.lang.javascript
    <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/js-index.htm> jscr maths, dates, sources.
    <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> TP/BP/Delphi/jscr/&c, FAQ items, links.
     
    Dr John Stockton, Sep 20, 2006
    #9
  10. Lee Guest

    said:
    >
    >As I said, "I access this group through Google Groups
    >and didn't see anything about
    >a FAQ."


    What does that mean? Does Google Group normally identify a FAQ
    for newsgroups? If so, it seems to be unreliable. As was pointed
    out, you should always scan the past week's titles in the newsgroup
    for any reference to a FAQ and follow it, even if the particular
    reference doesn't seem to refer to your particular problem.


    >> >Can't the Javascript developers just make a regular sleep function that
    >> >doesn't thread?

    >>
    >> Of course they can. But it would be entirely unnecessary. If you want
    >> an efficient delay, just call setTimeout when the present thread is
    >> finished, and give it the new code; adapt your mode of thinking to the
    >> environment.

    >
    >As someone mentioned earlier in this thread, "The second option (and,
    >if I'm correct that you've place the timeout in a
    >loop then probably the easier one for you) is to stagger the timeouts."
    >Yes, much easier. I wrote my script in the most intuitive way for me,
    >and I would have appreciated a plain old delay with no threading and
    >not having to figure out how to adapt my code. Increasing the delay by
    >the amount of the original delay for each iteration isn't such an
    >obvious solution even if you know about the threading. KISS.


    That's probably not the simplest or most supportable way to use
    setTimeout() to do what you want to do.
    See http://www.jibbering.com/faq/#FAQ4_20

    Web browsers are event-driven systems. Event-driven systems should
    never sleep. Providing setTimeout() and setInterval() instead of
    any sort of sleep() was a well-considered design decision.


    --
     
    Lee, Sep 21, 2006
    #10
  11. Guest

    Dr John Stockton wrote:
    > JRS: In article <>,
    > dated Tue, 19 Sep 2006 17:14:10 remote, seen in
    > news:comp.lang.javascript, posted :
    >
    > > ...
    > >and help publicize his website in his signature.
    > > ...

    >
    > And why not? IMHO, the site is useful only if people read it, and for
    > that they need to know that it exists. But perhaps you think that I get
    > financial gain from people reading it? If so, you have a very sordidly
    > mercenary attitude.


    My sentence was, "I appreciate the help of someone knowledgeable just
    like everyone else, but not if it means allowing someone as rude as you
    to get an ego boost from it and help publicize his website in his
    signature." I won't research whether you gain from it, but I assume you
    do so I'm against it.


    Dr John Stockton wrote:
    > >> It's a good idea to read the newsgroup and its FAQ.

    > >
    > >You never told me where this FAQ exists. You mean the link in your
    > >signature?

    >
    > I require, but fortunately do not presume, a modicum of intelligence in
    > my readers.


    In case you really didn't understand, you shouldn't expect newcomers to
    look at people's signature ads. You never told me where the FAQ exists
    or how I should have learned about it. You just attacked me for not
    reading it. There's no way of knowing whether the FAQ is official by
    seeing it mentioned in someone's signature along with his other ads. I
    don't click every link to unsorted information that I see, especially
    when I have a specific question.

    Someone should give you a dishonorable revoking of your doctorate.
     
    , Sep 21, 2006
    #11
  12. Guest

    Lee wrote:
    > said:
    > >
    > >As I said, "I access this group through Google Groups
    > >and didn't see anything about
    > >a FAQ."

    >
    > What does that mean? Does Google Group normally identify a FAQ
    > for newsgroups? If so, it seems to be unreliable. As was pointed
    > out, you should always scan the past week's titles in the newsgroup
    > for any reference to a FAQ and follow it, even if the particular
    > reference doesn't seem to refer to your particular problem.


    I don't think Google normally identifies a FAQ, but it does have an
    about page, which I usually read (
    http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/about ). I think I
    had good reason to believe that my question was appropriate considering
    the research I'd done. I shouldn't be expected to read a FAQ to find an
    answer when I'd already read pages specifically about the...method or
    whatever it's called...that I was having a problem with, as well as
    forum posts, etc. You have to stop and ask at some point.


    > >As someone mentioned earlier in this thread, "The second option (and,
    > >if I'm correct that you've place the timeout in a
    > >loop then probably the easier one for you) is to stagger the timeouts."
    > >Yes, much easier. I wrote my script in the most intuitive way for me,
    > >and I would have appreciated a plain old delay with no threading and
    > >not having to figure out how to adapt my code. Increasing the delay by
    > >the amount of the original delay for each iteration isn't such an
    > >obvious solution even if you know about the threading. KISS.

    >
    > That's probably not the simplest or most supportable way to use
    > setTimeout() to do what you want to do.


    Considering what I'd already written, my coding style, and what two or
    three people told me, it probably was the simplest in my case, but I'd
    probably look into more standard solutions if I intended to do much
    Javascript development in the future. I'm more of a server-side person
    because it's easier to protect code and you have more powerful
    languages to choose from.


    > See http://www.jibbering.com/faq/#FAQ4_20
    >
    > Web browsers are event-driven systems. Event-driven systems should
    > never sleep. Providing setTimeout() and setInterval() instead of
    > any sort of sleep() was a well-considered design decision.


    There's no real reasoning there. It seems like setTimeout does what
    sleep does. I guess it shortens execution time in some cases because it
    doesn't wait around for stuff it's not explicitly told to delay. I
    think it should be the programmer's responsibility to decide when
    sleep() is appropriate. No big deal though because I'm not sure. I just
    wish the documentation was better. I still don't know where to look for
    the best Javascript documentation.
     
    , Sep 21, 2006
    #12
  13. Randy Webb Guest

    Randy Webb, Sep 21, 2006
    #13
  14. Guest

    Randy Webb wrote:
    > Dr John Stockton said the following on 9/20/2006 4:45 PM:
    >
    > <snip>
    >
    > > You are a windbag.

    >
    > And you are an idiot.
    >
    > --
    > Randy
    > Chance Favors The Prepared Mind
    > comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq & newsgroup weekly
    > Javascript Best Practices - http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/


    Interesting reasoning.
     
    , Sep 21, 2006
    #14
  15. Lee Guest

    said:
    >
    >Lee wrote:


    >I shouldn't be expected to read a FAQ to find an
    >answer when I'd already read pages specifically about the...method or
    >whatever it's called...that I was having a problem with, as well as
    >forum posts, etc. You have to stop and ask at some point.


    You do realize that FAQ stands for Frequently Asked Questions?
    You should always read the FAQ of any newsgroup before posting
    a question.


    >> See http://www.jibbering.com/faq/#FAQ4_20
    >>
    >> Web browsers are event-driven systems. Event-driven systems should
    >> never sleep. Providing setTimeout() and setInterval() instead of
    >> any sort of sleep() was a well-considered design decision.

    >
    >There's no real reasoning there. It seems like setTimeout does what
    >sleep does.


    Not remotely. setTimeout() doesn't pause execution of anything.
    It simply adds a statement to an event queue to be executed after
    a specified amount of time has passed. In the meantime, other
    Javascript can continue to run and the browser is still able to
    respond to button clicks, etc, which would not be the case if
    sleep() were used.


    >I think it should be the programmer's responsibility to decide when
    >sleep() is appropriate.


    Javascript is very commonly used by people who aren't software
    professionals and who don't bother to read the documentation.
    If a sleep() function was available, many of them would use it,
    resulting in users disabling Javascript in order to maintain
    control over their browsers.


    --
     
    Lee, Sep 21, 2006
    #15
  16. Randy Webb Guest

    said the following on 9/20/2006 11:25 PM:
    > Randy Webb wrote:
    >> Dr John Stockton said the following on 9/20/2006 4:45 PM:
    >>
    >> <snip>
    >>
    >>> You are a windbag.

    >> And you are an idiot.
    >>

    > Interesting reasoning.


    Not interesting, it's the result of putting up with his pedantic
    bullshit for almost 10 years now and realizing that he truly is an idiot
    in the original sense of the word.


    --
    Randy
    Chance Favors The Prepared Mind
    comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq & newsgroup weekly
    Javascript Best Practices - http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/
     
    Randy Webb, Sep 21, 2006
    #16
  17. Guest

    Lee wrote:

    > >It seems like setTimeout does what
    > >sleep does.

    >
    > Not remotely. setTimeout() doesn't pause execution of anything.
    > It simply adds a statement to an event queue to be executed after
    > a specified amount of time has passed.


    I meant that I thought it does everything sleep does _plus_ it allows
    the script to continue, assuming there's anything else for the script
    to do. If there's nothing else for the script to do, I figured it
    functions as sleep() does, so I wasn't sure "Event-driven systems
    should never sleep" was accurate. But, now I see:

    > In the meantime, other
    > Javascript can continue to run and the browser is still able to
    > respond to button clicks, etc, which would not be the case if
    > sleep() were used.

    ....
    > Javascript is very commonly used by people who aren't software
    > professionals and who don't bother to read the documentation.
    > If a sleep() function was available, many of them would use it,
    > resulting in users disabling Javascript in order to maintain
    > control over their browsers.


    I thought sleep() allows other things to happen that aren't in the
    script. Do-nothing loops are the types of delays that cause problems.
    What I wanted was a sleep() that wouldn't start a new thread and would
    stop execution until the specified time elapses, but at the same time
    allowed things external to that particular script to happen.

    I've been thinking that the the cause of one of the problems I'm still
    having with the animated version of the script in question (
    http://www.polisource.com/PublicMisc/list-splitter-animation.html ) is
    due to so many threads being created (or events being added to the
    queue, however you say it) without waiting for the previous one to be
    executed. Sleep() might eliminate that problem. For example, at the
    prompts, enter 10 (columns), v (vertical), and w (webpage). If your
    computer isn't really fast, the animation won't be smooth. On my
    Celeron, 2.1 GH with 640 MB RAM, there's a long pause and you miss some
    of the movement, but after 30 seconds everything appears in its proper
    position. Entering different parameters might show bugs unrelated to
    the jumpiness so I've been telling people to use 10, v, w.
     
    , Sep 21, 2006
    #17
  18. Guest

    Randy Webb wrote:
    > said the following on 9/20/2006 11:25 PM:
    > > Randy Webb wrote:


    > Not interesting, it's the result of putting up with his pedantic
    > bullshit for almost 10 years now and realizing that he truly is an idiot
    > in the original sense of the word.


    Oh, I actually thought you were calling me an idiot. My experience with
    the Perl community made me jump to conclusions. I was beginning to
    wonder if I should just stay away from web technology communities all
    together.
     
    , Sep 21, 2006
    #18
  19. Randy Webb Guest

    said the following on 9/21/2006 2:05 AM:
    > Randy Webb wrote:
    >> said the following on 9/20/2006 11:25 PM:
    >>> Randy Webb wrote:

    >
    >> Not interesting, it's the result of putting up with his pedantic
    >> bullshit for almost 10 years now and realizing that he truly is an idiot
    >> in the original sense of the word.

    >
    > Oh, I actually thought you were calling me an idiot.


    Nah, I save those terms for people who deserve to be called an idiot :)

    > My experience with the Perl community made me jump to conclusions.


    What you are going to find in this group (and any technical group in
    general) are the people who stick to some standard and thats it, people
    who think they know it all, those who know a lot but know they don't
    know it all, and some who just don't know there head from a hole in the
    ground (some fit multiple categories). You just have to stick around
    this group long enough (or read enough of the archives) to know which
    are which.

    Everybody has there moments (I do) but JRS seems to have them daily for
    23 1/2 hours at the time.

    > I was beginning to wonder if I should just stay away from web technology
    > communities all together.


    And miss out on all this fun?!?!?!

    --
    Randy
    Chance Favors The Prepared Mind
    comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq & newsgroup weekly
    Javascript Best Practices - http://www.JavascriptToolbox.com/bestpractices/
     
    Randy Webb, Sep 21, 2006
    #19
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Neil Zanella
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    10,222
  2. FrankEsser

    Thread time - strange delays

    FrankEsser, Jul 4, 2005, in forum: C++
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    319
  3. Replies:
    7
    Views:
    285
    A. Sinan Unur
    Feb 14, 2006
  4. recoder
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    291
    recoder
    Jan 17, 2009
  5. Isaac Won
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    405
    Ulrich Eckhardt
    Mar 4, 2013
Loading...

Share This Page