|
Posted by Barry on July 10, 2008, 1:35 am
Please log in for more thread options
> Barry wrote:
>>> Michael Fesser wrote:
>>>> .oO(The Natural Philosopher)
>>>>
>>>>> Patient Guy wrote:
>>>>>> So, based on your response, you are telling me that a PHP processing
>>>>>> implementation has no interprocess communication capability, or
>>>>>> ability to interface with a (Java)script interpreter.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Java SCRIPT (as opposed to java) runs in the browser exclusively.
>>>> Wrong. Various engines for running JS outside a browser context exist,
>>>> as already mentioned in the thread. JS is already incorporated in a
>>>> number of applications and document types that have nothing to do with
>>>> HTML or a browser.
>>>>
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Javascript#Uses_outside_web_pages
>>>>
>>>>> It makes local decsison without reference to the server. This is great
>>>>> for speed..you can change screen appearance fast and dynamically,
>>>>> producing e.g. drop down menus and the like) at the expense of having
>>>>> to download all the code TO the browser and more data than you
>>>>> probably need.
>>>>>
>>>>> PHP is EXCLUSIVELY server side
>>>> PHP can also run in a browser (a proof-of-concept plugin for IE
>>>> exists),
>>>> on the local machine, as a shell script, with a GUI ... It could even
>>>> be
>>>> used like JS or Python for scripting in standalone applications.
>>>>
>>>>> Halfway huse s do exist - Ajax - where partial page reloads are done
>>>>> dynamically, using I think javascipt on e browser and PHP server side.
>>>> AJAX has nothing to do with either of them, at least not by definition.
>>>> It's just an overestimated hype, but in fact it's nothing new. It's
>>>> just
>>>> a slightly different way for sending HTTP requests, but doesn't say
>>>> anything about the language(s) to use or the type of data that's sent.
>>>>
>>>> A plugin or even an external application might be able to access the
>>>> browser's XHR object directly without any JavaScript, and the data
>>>> doesn't have to be in XML format. So what's left from "AJAX" in
>>>> practice? Just the "A" for asynchronous.
>>>>
>>>>>> A server, or a server-associated process, can start a script host,
>>>>>> passing some form of input to it, and the script host does the script
>>>>>> interpretation, while the calling process waits for output.
>>>>>> However this is achieved, PHP (by design?) has no script interface,
>>>>>> based on your response.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, its perfectly possible to pass commands from PHP to some other
>>>>> engine: teh classic example is the Mysql server, which is interfaced
>>>>> to PHP with a library ..but no one would ever attempt to execuste java
>>>>> SCRIPT on the server
>>>> There's no reason to not do it. And in fact some do.
>>>>
>>>>> because its a bloody awful language
>>>> Depends. It's a totally different way of thinking and programming. You
>>>> simply can't compare it with a classical OOP language. But once you've
>>>> understood it, you might find prototype-based programming quite useful
>>>> in certain situations.
>>>>
>>>>> and is only by and large written for broswers.
>>>> No language is written just for a single environment.
>>>>
>>>>> Once you are server side you can in principle write in any language
>>>>> you like, PHP being just a common popular one, but shell script
>>>>> python, C, C++. PERL Java and so on are perfectly possible.
>>>> Exactly. You can use _every_ programming language you like. And JS
>>>> undoubtly _is_ a programming language.
>>>>
>>>> Micha
>>> Strictly you are correct. In practice for most people I stand by the
>>> original post.
>>>
>>> I see almost no reason to use javascript at all except when its the only
>>> option, and that is the case when its the only (well supported) language
>>> a browser can run.
>>>
>>> Likewise expecting people to have php plugins for their browsers..is..at
>>> best, expecting a lot.
>>>
>>>
>>> Oh, and several languages have been written for a single environment: I
>>> wrote one myself in fact.
>>
>> 'several' is not 'one'...and i hardly think anyone but you actually uses
>> your home-brewed version. ;^)
>>
>> can you name another of the several?
>
> PL/S. Used internally by IBM for system development in the 80's, it was a
> subset of PL/1 with inline assembler.
>
> Microcode for any of the microprocessors out there. All are written in
> specialized languages (same for microcode on mainframes).
>
> There are lots of specialized languages out there. But since they are
> specialized, you seldom hear of them unless you have a need for them. Not
> that there's anything secret about most - just that they are seldom
> mentioned outside of the groups which use them.
agreed, jerry. i was having fun with phil's one example to prove his point
being a homemade language. the question i posed was just encouragement from
him to follow with the route he (and you) just did.
| 
XML Sitemap