bazsouthafrica

Thanks. It seems like such a waster of time and money to do this all the time. For mail, I meant physical mail (email I always unsubscribe). I just can't get rid of all this physical mail.

Question: Do people actually read all this "physical mail spam". I assume they do, otherwise companies wouldn't bother us.

Oh no. I was hoping that this would not be the case. In your opinion, is there any service that can do this for me? I mean, I am sure other people have this problem as well, someone must be solving it?

Hi Sam, I would like to apply for Winter 2017. If we are not accepted for this batch, would it hurt our future chances (i.e. could we apply again for the next batch without being negatively affected).

Hi. I (the person that submitted the story) didn't actually write it. My best friend did. I have told him of your comment and I will ask him to reply to you. Note that he wrote this early 2000, so he may have to look over it again.

I agree whole heartedly with this statement. To all "domain investors": Please tell me how you add value to the human race by investing in domains?

I have tried those services. They never give me any info - you see, nobody has ever used that name before.

The squatter has several names registered, has indicated to me that my particular name of interest is for sale, and he asked me to give him the best possible price. I said $300, and I never heard back from him. If I want to use the name, do you have any suggestions?

Hi

I did not downvote your comment, but it is fundamentally incorrect. If your JavaScript program has been designed well, then asynchronisity by using an event driven model is the way to go. But that is very different to what I said about functions stopping the execution of the current function. This is true. For example

var func1 = function() { //Execute something here }

var func2 = function() { //Execute something here func1(); //Stop execution of this function, and rather execute func2 //Execute something here }

I hope the above explains this a bit better.

This is exactly the catch with respect to function invocation method that I was trying to point out. It seems that in a call back method, `this` gets bound to the global object. I suspect it is because it is called with the same mechanism that is used for function invocation. That being said, I did not use this example because one needs to implement a callback to see the error. My example that I chose in my article was designed so that anyone could just create the JavaScript, fire it up in a browser, and see the error for themselves.

I do however intend to use an example similar to the one you have presented when I cover closures and scoping in JavaScript.

I realise that everyone is critic, but I am sorry: I understand fully how `this` gets bound and how scoping works in Javasscript. And it sucks!

Scoping: Javascript uses C/Java notation but it does not have block scope, only function scope. That to me seems very misleading.

And with regards to `this`, the way function invocation sets `this` differs totally from method invocation. How can this not be a problem!

Hi Guys

I just want to give you some feedbacks in the comments (I am the author of this article).

Firstly, with regards to the title, I did not read the newsguidlines document - I have submitted links in the way and style that other people did. For sure, in the future, I will follow these guidlines, but this must be a huge problem as lots of people do this.

Secondly, these are patterns (not language features). Yes, I was inspired by Douglas Crockford's book where he describes this as patterns. To me describing them as patterns makes sense: For instance, there is really nothing different about calling a method and a function. If you have to make a difference, then it is a pattern. And because putting new in front of a function also calls that function, it is in my mind a pattern. And in that sense, so is apply.

But I welcome the debate, and thanks for the constructive comments. I will take all these comments into consideration the next time I submit something.

The one thing that always come to mind with responsiveness is that the more complex the site, the more difficult it is to make responsive web work. Now this may sound intuitive, but I am always astounded as to how people now think that responsive web is the magic bullet to solve all woes.

I think responsive Web is really at its most powerful if the site is minimal (like google). For any advanced site, either lots of care needs to be taken or perhaps the dreaded "m" subdomain?