L8V2L

Why so? When nothing is return in JavaScript, it evaluate to undefined value. What is the harm of not using the operator void?I suggestion a while back to give us the capability to browse by likes. I feel this will make for a better GUI for everyone in the forums.

I've seem the convention of using void in programming language. What is the reason for. For example: // module 1void function module1(){ // module 1 code...}();// module 2void function module2(){ // module 2 code...}();What is the reason the void operator?If no reply, but look at, just give me a link than.

with(Object){with(prototype){with(toString){with(call([])){slice(8,-1);}}}}// printout => Array//Object.prototype.toString.call(o).slice(8,-1);

Oh. Than I mistaken the uppercase: //get the q parameter from URL$q=$_REQUEST["q"]; $hint="";For SELECT SQL style. On other note, with is a handle tool! When I start learning nodejs, I will request that they leave it in the v8 engine. I can think of many ways it could/will be useful!var object = {}, obj = {prop0:0,prop1:1, prop2:2, prop3:3}; counter = -1;object.__defineGetter__('foo', function() { return ++counter;});with(object){with(obj){console.log(foo+"n"+foo+"n"+foo+"n"+foo+"n"+prop0+"n"+prop1+"n"+prop2+"n"+prop3);}} // object[0,1, 2, 3], obj:[0,1,2,3]I'll also request to extend the functionality of it, to take as many parameter as the programmer desire: with(object, obj){...}

SQL is what I'm referring to. Or do they not need to use that language die this task? I see php using it(note that I'm not that knowledgeable on the SQL spec)

http://www.w3schools.com/ajax/ajax_aspphp.aspPhp://get the q parameter from URL$q=$_REQUEST["q"]; $hint="";Asp:'get the q parameter from URLq=ucase(request.querystring("q")) http://www.w3schools.com/ajax/ajax_database.asp

Mongodb tutorial.

There is one exception to the rule that a property assignment either fails or creates or sets a property in the original object. If o inherits the property x, and that property is an accessor property with a setter method, then that setter method is called rather than creating a new property x in o. Note, however, that the setter method is called on the object o, not on the prototype object that defines the property, so if the setter method defines any properties, it will do so on o, and it will again leave the prototype chain unmodified. (Laymen terms please)

So I can send xml data as a sting and still it up with xslt, to turn it into XHTML?

There isn't any clear(known) example of this: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- Edited by XMLSpy -->-<bookstore>is this a document fragment?-<book category="cooking"><title lang="en">Everyday Italian</title><author>Giada De Laurentiis</author><year>2005</year><price>30.00</price></book>And can extract this fragment?-<book category="children"><title lang="en">Harry Potter</title><author>J K. Rowling</author><year>2005</year><price>29.99</price></book>-<book category="web"><title lang="en">XQuery Kick Start</title><author>James McGovern</author><author>Per Bothner</author><author>Kurt Cagle</author><author>James Linn</author><author>Vaidyanathan Nagarajan</author><year>2003</year><price>49.99</price></book>-<book category="web" cover="paperback"><title lang="en">Learning XML</title><author>Erik T. Ray</author><year>2003</year><price>39.95</price></book></bookstore>

So I can send xml data as a sting and still it up with xslt, to turn it into XHTML?

Another thing I notice is that in one of the example they have a responseText but the out put was an HTML table. So one can transfer HTML as sting and it'll be parse automatically when out put in an HTML page?

Do asp and php use two different query languages? I'm in Ajax tutorial and notices the query syntax for both of them are different.

:-( it was a nice read I guess it's just men for me instead of mean cause I would rather utilize xml functionality, or what I like to say HCX~JANM.

There's a couple of books I'm reading and wants to read. I don't feel worthy to change my signature yet to reflect this knew joy found.I like w3s for the introduction shallow nice of it. A quick jump in, above way to get your feet wet. I don't mind this shallowness, if they put nodejs tutorial and only put the basic essential of server side programming in it using node. I'll be happy with that, to just get my feet wet.I discover that book are GOLD~! GOLD~! And if one truly wish to learn, they'll read one.

AAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!! THEY PUT ANGULARJS IN THE JS TUTORIAL!!!!!! AAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!THEY PUT ANGULARJS IN THE JS TUTORIAL!!!!!! THEYRE GOING TO PUT NODEJS SOON, I JUST KNOW IT!!!!!AAAAAAWWWWWWWWW!!!!THEY PUT ANGULARJS IN THE JS TUTORIAL!!!!!! OMG IMMA GO SPAM THEIR INBOX TO SHOW MY APPRECIATION!!!!!!!AAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

var js={arr:[{obj0:0,obj1:1,obj2:2}]};with(js.arr[0]){console.log(obj0+"n"+obj1+"n"+obj2);}They need to rethink the deprecating of the with statement.var js={arr:[{obj0:0,obj1:1,obj2:2}]};var wit = js.arr[0];console.log(wit.obj0+"n"+wit.obj1+"n"+wit.obj2);...yeah, they need to rethink the deprecating of the with statement.

Also, I believe that the owner or the employees of the site should post more here. Like little lessons that could not be put on the site cause of rule against.

function myFunction(x, y) { eval(((y)&& eval(y = y))||eval(y = 1));//(((y)&&(y = y))||(y = 1)) <-- this is another way you could do it return x * y}document.getElementById("demo").innerHTML = myFunction(4);

Js oop tutorial.

It was just for experimenting, educational learning, and to gain understanding... It's not like I'mma end up writing complicated code cause I like it in such a written matter... I think....

.....

No milk for you.(hold a water bottle up and spare in the cat face) bad kitty, bad.

I believe that what I concluded: