ECMA-262-3 in detail. Chapter 8. Evaluation strategy.
in [JavaScript]
|
From: Dmitry A. Soshnikov on 10 Apr 2010 15:47 Inform you about the next translation: "ECMA-262-3 in detail. Chapter 8. Evaluation strategy." http://dmitrysoshnikov.com/ecmascript/chapter-8-evaluation-strategy/ Dmitry.
From: Ivan S on 11 Apr 2010 05:47 Thanks Dmitry. Very interesting and informing chapter. :) This part sound confusing to me: "Moreover, in Python community exactly this terminology by sharing is used. As to other languages there alternative terminologies can be used and which can often confuse as are crossed in the name with other strategies." Maybe this could be better translation (if I understood correctly): "Moreover, in Python's community exactly this terminology by sharing is used (is being used, I would say). As for other languages, there are alternative terminologies that can be used and which can often be confusing as they are crossed (or, in a contrary) with the name(s) in other strategies." .... More fixed translation: "In Ruby this strategy is named as by reference. Again, on the one hand it is passed not a copy of a big structure (i.e., seems, not by value), but on the other hand, we deal not with the original reference to object and cannot change it; consequently, this crossing in terminology again can confuse." -> "In Ruby, this strategy is named as by reference. Again, on (the) one hand it is not passed as a copy of a big structure (i.e., seems, not by value), but on the other hand, we don't deal with the original reference to object and cannot change it; consequently, this crossing in terminology again can be confusing." "The more precisely this behavior..." -> "More precisely, this behavior..." Ivan
From: Dmitry A. Soshnikov on 11 Apr 2010 09:14 On Apr 11, 1:47 pm, Ivan S <ivan.sku...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Dmitry. > > Very interesting and informing chapter. :) > > This part sound confusing to me: > > "Moreover, in Python community exactly this terminology by sharing > is used. As to other languages there alternative terminologies can be > used and which can often confuse as are crossed in the name with other > strategies." > > Maybe this could be better translation (if I understood correctly): > > "Moreover, in Python's community exactly this terminology by sharing > is used (is being used, I would say). As for other languages, there > are alternative terminologies that can be used and which can often be > confusing as they are crossed (or, in a contrary) with the name(s) in > other strategies." > > ... > > More fixed translation: > > "In Ruby this strategy is named as by reference. Again, on the one > hand it is passed not a copy of a big structure (i.e., seems, not by > value), but on the other hand, we deal not with the original reference > to object and cannot change it; consequently, this crossing in > terminology again can confuse." > > -> > > "In Ruby, this strategy is named as by reference. Again, on (the) one > hand it is not passed as a copy of a big structure (i.e., seems, not > by value), but on the other hand, we don't deal with the original > reference to object and cannot change it; consequently, this crossing > in terminology again can be confusing." > > "The more precisely this behavior..." -> "More precisely, this > behavior..." > Thanks Ivan; fixed. Dmitry.
From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn on 12 Apr 2010 09:18 Ivan S wrote: > More fixed translation: "More fixed" is like "a bit pregnant" ;-) > "In Ruby this strategy is named as by reference. Again, on the one > hand — it is passed not a copy of a big structure (i.e., seems, not by > value), but on the other hand, we deal not with the original reference > to object and cannot change it; consequently, this crossing in > terminology again can confuse." > > -> > > "In Ruby, this strategy is named as by reference. Again, on (the) one "is named as by reference" is most certainly wrong. Perhaps "is named 'by reference'" (to avoid the ambiguous "is called 'by reference'") was meant. AFAIK the `the' must be omitted from the first part of the phrase. > hand — it is not passed as a copy of a big structure (i.e., seems, not The predicate in the parenthesis is lacking a subject ("it"), and the "i.e." does not seem to fit here. > by value), but on the other hand, we don't deal with the original Perhaps contractions should not be used in such texts, as it is more often the case in writing than in speech. You have proposed "it is", not "it's", so for consistency there should be "do not", not "don't" (except perhaps at the end of a sentence). Another factor in favor of not using a contraction here is that (as ISTM) the "not" is emphasized. > reference to object and cannot change it; consequently, this crossing > in terminology again can be confusing." Either the em dash must be a comma, or both trailing punctuation marks must be omitted from the phrase. So either: In Ruby, this strategy is named "by reference". Again, on one hand, it is not passed as a copy of a big structure (i.e., it seems, not by value), but on the other hand, we do not deal with the original ... Or: In Ruby, this strategy is named "by reference". Again, on one hand it is not passed as a copy of a big structure (i.e., it seems, not by value), but on the other hand we do not deal with the original ... <http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/on+the+one+hand...on+the+other+hand> <http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/on-the-one-hand-on-the- other-hand> The sentences are still overly long and complicated, which easily and frequently happens in word-by-word translations (BTDT). One should try to split them, and avoid the more complicated rhetorical figures, so that they are better understood. Some commas might need to be omitted, too. Probably Michael Wojcik, of Rhetoric & Writing at Michigan State University, who occasionally posts here, can provide further advice. PointedEars -- Danny Goodman's books are out of date and teach practices that are positively harmful for cross-browser scripting. -- Richard Cornford, cljs, <cife6q$253$1$8300dec7(a)news.demon.co.uk> (2004)
From: Tim Down on 12 Apr 2010 09:32
On Apr 12, 2:18 pm, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedE...(a)web.de> wrote: > > "In Ruby, this strategy is named as by reference. Again, on (the) one > > hand it is not passed as a copy of a big structure (i.e., seems, not > > AFAIK the `the' must be omitted from the first part of the phrase. > Not so. "on the one hand, ..." is perfectly good English. Tim |