Can we just drop this? This is getting very very petty now and really in the end has no point to it.
I am sure everyone on this list who has been reading this thread is dumber for it! Please............don't we have work to do? -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Barnes Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 1:12 PM To: CFAussie Mailing List Subject: [cfaussie] Re: Aussie CF Developers On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 12:14:50 +1100, Andrew Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Everyone, > > The last couple of days has seen some interesting words going back and > forth, I would like to post this to the list as a way of saying be a little > more careful. I wouldn't say interesting, i'd say mindless bantering... but eye of the beholder and all. The fact you're going over the same points over and over and over with now yet another thread leads me personally to believe that you obviously need to take the rest of the afternoon off, find the nearest bartender and unload your pent up misery while sharing a calming drink such as beer with em... head my advice.. you need to chill. > Due to the posts about the suggestion upgrades, should have made people a > little more aware that some developers tend to make too may assumptions to > what the others are asking for. Much like you're doing now.. practice what you preech. > As a member of many mailing lists that include, Java, ASP, J#, C# and > Coldfusion I have to say that this list really has many people who don't > take the time to see the problem at hand. What I mean is that other language > developers don't assume that they can afford to get the latest Visual Studio > .Net to solve their solution, but try to find a way around the current > problem. CF developers seem to be a breed onto themselves. Really? I'm on a quite a few lists and i'm finding the opposite? are you assuming this again? where is your research, hey if we are being factual about key points into what is taboo amongst forums like this i think its pertinent you backup your - what looks like exhaustive - research with case studies at the very least. Point is.. you clown. > I will use the recent posts on suggestion of upgrades as an example on this, > with the recent posts on the JS problem that I had because they are related. *rolls eyes* flogging a dead horse and all, why not... > There are many situations that we as developers have to face, and when I > come across badly written code whether it be because the developer had to do > it in a big hurry or because it was developed by someone who didn't really > know, it really makes it hard to maintain. Thats your problem, i'm yet to figure out how the hell this all has anything to do with the said topic at all... but anyway. > One thing that people are very quick at is the assumption that the person > asking the question hasn't looked at other options, in the case of > developing for older versions of Coldfusion there are many reasons as to why > they have to, whether it be because of shared hosts that will not upgrade or > the person that pays your salary/contract sees no need to upgrade. So whats your initial beef? the fact that 3 lines cost you .04c in bandwidth? or the fact that a reminder was too much for you to bare. Informing someone of a flaw in code, is a good thing in my opinion - whether they wrote it or not is irrelevant. Its like when you code and someone behind you goes "Oh Scott, you didn't close off that if statement properly..." Am i then going to sit there for an hour+ lecturing him on the importants of shutting his mouth about things he assumes i didn't pickup on? document.all vs getElementById() was a *simple* reminder you ass. Not a declaration of war. If we want to draw lines in the sand, its actually your fault for not giving us the full information pertaining to your problem. You see, your question was: "...The following javascript I would have thought would change the state of a checkbox, can anyone tell me why I am screwing this up..." Now actually one answer technically is correct in saying that not using getElementById() *COULD* also be a cause for errors you receive that and you weren't using dot.checked property checking. As you did not clarify the browser technology in question. So based on the limited amount of information the follow up answer had a large amount of relivance. "..The following javascript I would have thought would change the state of a checkbox, can anyone tell me why I am screwing this up (its an IE Only application)..." Then you wouldn't be having a cry session.... > Whatever the reason as a developer we have to be aware that there are > reasons behind everything that has been done in the past, that we end up > having to maintain in the future. Budgets, are the biggest factor in all of > this and if the budget does not allow for an upgrade whether it be a best > practice or a software upgrade then don't suggest anything else. thank you for that tip - but you now assume we don't know about that.. again practice what you preech. > I tried to point out without going into too much depth, that the application > that I am working on has developed into something very big, budget is a big > issue and even a small change that has not been approved can have very > drastic consequences. But certain people did not wish to acknowledge this, > and instead showed there true colours by attacking further. You drew first blood, we handed you your ass. You got sooky, and felt the need for a 20 page essay on why the cfaussie world hates you. You also pointed that information out AFTER you attacked us and we probed further by backing our claims as to why getElementById() is the optimal choice - upgrade aside its relevant to todays DHTML and makes good coding sense. How you interpret that information or use that information is entirely your own choice.. choice being the keyword. > All I wanted to point out was that we all at some point in time will end up > maintaining older code, whether it be bad or good it will be running on > older technology and designed for the browser it was intended for at the > time. In 10 years who knows what we are writing today will run on the new > browsers or not, but till then we maintain what we have to maintain now. > Best practice or not, chance to upgrade or not. Thanks for spending another paragraph outlining what you stated in the previous one, as now reading the same point for the second time, i'm much wiser about something....... > It seems that there are too many people here that live on the edge of new > technology and forget about the older technology, and that has been proven > by the influx of posts in the last few days. Oh yeah, getElementById() is cutting edge, its the pepsi max generation of dhtml coding.. It was just a freakin reminder YOU JACKASS.. > Other mailing lists can behave this way, but for some reason CFAussie can't > I wonder why that is. Is it because we think we can live on the edge of new > technology and forget the past! Wake up guys, the Y2K bug developers who > knew cobal/fotran made a packet because there were not too many who kept up > with older technology!! Assumptions again.. > Regards > Andrew Scott > Technical Consultant Time for you to take some Andrew Happy time now and let the world continue on its chaotic course as you tried your darn best to liberate us from mass-ignorance in how folk should interact with one another on programming based mailing lists... I have no respect for you as a professional after this thread - while its not really its weight in worth - just thought i'd let you know official like and all so there is no assumptions made... -- Regards, Scott Barnes http://www.mossyblog.com --- You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/ --- You are currently subscribed to cfaussie as: [email protected] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Aussie Macromedia Developers: http://lists.daemon.com.au/
