Talk:Audio alarm: Difference between revisions
m
Thundergnat moved page Talk:AudioAlarm to Talk:Audio alarm: Follow normal task title naming / capitalization policy
m (It probably just needs some rewriting.) |
Thundergnat (talk | contribs) m (Thundergnat moved page Talk:AudioAlarm to Talk:Audio alarm: Follow normal task title naming / capitalization policy) |
||
| (5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 8:
: ''And'', let me reiterate your "app"'s design goal: you kindly send this "app" to some hapless schmuck who has never seen a file extension or an alarm clock, so that he can wake up in time; now every night before he goes to bed he needs to fire up an html file, calculate how many ''seconds'' he needs to sleep, type that in carefully, remember what ''filename'' it is and type ''that'' in carefully, then spend all night worrying if he typed anything wrong (you did no error check) or if the computer would itself go to sleep before dawn (Mr. Schmuck might not have your l33t mobile device)—I feel sorry for the poor soul. Then again, it's probably his own fault for making acquaintance with a "major geekage" who doesn't know to use javascript to calcuate time or file drag and drop. Meh. --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 23:10, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
::It probably just needs some rewriting. I think an analogue clock with an audible alarm (a variation on the "Draw a clock" task currently in draft), only it needs a full set of hands, a facility to set the alarm time, and a choice of audio file. This should not be a problem. I'm sure one of us can knock up a task description for that. [[User:Markhobley|Markhobley]] 23:31, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
What you were saying about "hapless schmuck", etc. was very funny. I'll tell all the other geeks what you said. But, I, being blind, make non-visual programs. With the HTML meta command and the "http-equiv" set to "refresh", the variable sets the content to a number of seconds, followed by ";url=" and then the filename, ".mp3". I've written all kinds of apps like this since 2007, and, with my knowledge of using MediaWiki editing (which I got from editing thousands of other wikis between late 2009 and now), that this is a programmer's wiki paradise. I can write apps, as long as they are original in the RC community. I guess mine ripped off of other ones or something. And what ridiculous person would say, "no more document.write for JavaScript"? That, and it's "writeln" counterpart, are the only way to actually produce HTML that's being manipulated by JavaScript. You know, I'm obsessed with client-side JavaScript. The JS definitive guide doesn't mention HTML "server tags" and server JS. What book would I need for that? Or, better yet, what RC page? [[User:Star651|Star651]] 23:52, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
: Eh I know how meta refresh tag works. The input of seconds is counter-intuitive from a program design point of view: normal people are much more comfortable with hour:minute notations when dealing with time span of more than a few minutes, especially so for someone who's already sleepy. The document.write is bad because there's no promise what you write is valid HTML/XML but the text is forcefully injected into the document as source code anyway. It's generally better to manipulate the DOM via document.createElement, document.insertBefore, etc. The refresh is easily done with a <code>window.setTimeout() { location.href = new_address }</code>, and while the timer is ticking, you can do other things, even cancel the timer if you want to. Using DOM instead of HTML code has another advantage: you don't invoke a reparse/reflow of the whole document, the browser only need to work with the parent element. Even if you ''really, really'' want to produce raw HTML code, you can use <code>element.InnerHTML = some_html_text</code>. This way, if something is wrong with the html you produced, only the element is clobbered, and you get a proper error indication unlike <code>document.write</code>. document.write should be considered obsolete in all regards. --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 00:13, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
No. In 2006 when I started learning JavaScript, I saw document.write so much, that I started picking up my mobile device, slapping my USB flash drives against the keybord, and making "yeee-haw!" sounds. That proves, that document.write is awesome, because you insert regular text into the document. I just upgraded my JS definitive guide from Edition Four to Edition Five, and, in Edition Five, I still see alert and prompt (and document.write). Just name a browser where the command doesn't work, and I'll say it's obsolete. Just one ... browser! And, yes, timers have a seconds button, and I'm representing that. [[User:Star651|Star651]] 01:37, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
: When discussing programming, a sentence like "that proves foo is awesome" automatically wins the argument, because that sentence is awesome. You won. --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 01:56, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
I have just been informed that AudioAlarm, an app that I invented (and submitted here), which was originally written in JavaScript, has been redone using a form of Basic. Whatever anonymous IP did this, thank you! I like it when my work is translated. Just like my Last.FM biography; it's been translated into French, so now people from France (and maybe Canada) can read about my music. Ship it out, boys! [[User:Star651|Star651]] 15:39, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
| |||