Prev: FAQ Topic - What does the future hold for ECMAScript? (2010-07-20)
Next: trying to do AJAX
From: dhtml on 3 Aug 2010 04:13
On Aug 3, 1:12 am, dhtml <dhtmlkitc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 30, 7:45 am, Asen Bozhilov <asen.bozhi...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
[...]
> have newsreader setup on this machine. I do not like GG and I think I
> may have just posted "c" by accident.

Confirmed.
--
Garrett

From: Asen Bozhilov on 3 Aug 2010 05:00
dhtml wrote:

> It's fine, but why do you think this is better or do you think the FAQ
> should use this instead?

Both versions are good. I posted my code, just for give another
alternative for people who read the FAQ entries. I am not pretended
for my version is better than FAQ code. In my version I do not use
three time string concatenations plus three invocation of `slice'
method. I am just using mathematical operation plus `replace' which I
suppose is faster than than version used by FAQ.
From: Lasse Reichstein Nielsen on 4 Aug 2010 12:16
dhtml <dhtmlkitchen(a)gmail.com> writes:

> On Jul 30, 7:45 am, Asen Bozhilov <asen.bozhi...(a)gmail.com> wrote:

>> return (yyyy + "-" + mm + "-" + dd).replace(/\b1/g, '');

I think RegExp replace is a little heavy-duty for something like this.
How about
return String(yyyy).substring(1) + "-" +
String(mm).substring(1) + "-" +
String(dd).substring(1);
?

/L
--
Lasse Reichstein Holst Nielsen
'Javascript frameworks is a disruptive technology'

From: Asen Bozhilov on 5 Aug 2010 04:54
Lasse Reichstein Nielsen wrote:
> I think RegExp replace is a little heavy-duty for something like this.

Indeed. I had to test in various implementations. I tested my approach
in Rhino 1.7 under Debian 5.0 and was faster than FAQ. From tests
provided by Dr J R Stockton and mines FAQ approach is faster than my.
Do you have explanation why? I am still thinking RegExp approach
should be faster than three string concatenation + three invocations
of `slice'.

> How about
>  return String(yyyy).substring(1) + "-" +
>      String(mm).substring(1) + "-" +
>      String(dd).substring(1);
> ?

Btw, I used similar version before I post RegExp approach. Do you have
any reasons to use `substring' instead of `slice'?

First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: FAQ Topic - What does the future hold for ECMAScript? (2010-07-20)
Next: trying to do AJAX