|
|
Posted by ^reaper^ on 08/23/05 12:19
While sipping absinthe, Onideus Mad Hatter heard a loud sucking noise
coming from alt.2600, and hastily inscribed the following unintelligible
Sanskrit in <news:7enkg11flo3uqsr06384mh9skrnr9c708m@4ax.com>:
> On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 16:04:12 -0700, "^reaper^" <knocking@deaths.door>
> wrote:
>
>>> That data is based on the research that I and others in some of my
>>> threads did using this site:
>>> http://www.backwater-productions.net/_test_platform/bw3/test.html
>>>
>>> Now if I could only get screen shots of IE on the Mac at 800x600,
>>> 1280x1024, 1152x864 and 1600x1200 it'd be a flawless positioning
>>> script....
>>>
>>> at least with the latest versions of IE (Mac & PC), Konqueror, Opera,
>>> Netscape, Firefox, Safari and Galeon.
>
>>Yes, I know what you are attempting to do.
>
> I'm not "attempting" anything, Sunshine, I'm DOING, there's a
> difference.
Uh-huh.
>>However, detecting your os/browser server side, for example
>>
>> http://www.spyderware.net/source/reaptest.htm
>>
>>provides a means to utilize your visitor logs for dynamically adding new
>>browser/os flavors as they come along,
>
> ...why would I want to do that? I mean, really, do you have ANY
> fuckin cl00 as to how many browsers there are out there? I'm
> certainly not interested in keeping track of every sloppy piece of
> shit that comes along. I'm only interested in the 99% range,
> attempting some sort of absolute perfect is just a waste of time, you
> would never get anything accomplished. Perfection doesn't exist, not
> in nature not in math not in anything. There is no such thing as a
> "perfect circle", take some higher level math courses if yer having
> trouble figure it out.
You need to achieve mediocrity first. I'll wait.
>>as well as reducing client side bandwidth and computes.
>
> Are you still doing dates as 00, 01, 02, 03?
>
> Fuck, you really need to get over this byte skimping fetish of yours
> and come on back to reality. Maybe if I was doing something other
> than just detecting the users browser and operating system you might
> have a point, but this nitpicking stupidity of yours over something
> that's about 1 kilobyte in size has just got to stop, kiddo, it's not
> healthy.
You're right. I keep forgetting you're only attempting to appeal to 20 or
so people, so size doesn't really matter.
>>Though, in light of the massive redundancy in your main.swf impl
>>
>> http://www.spyderware.net/source/omhflash.xml
>>
>>the 1.5k byte and 65 compute cycle reduction is negligble. *shrugs*
>
> As are most of your "reductions"...in fact most of your reductions
> sacrifice just a handful of kilobytes for a shit load of computing
> cycles and sometimes I think you forget that scripting languages run
> WAY slower than compiled languages...
Oh yes. That's a great excuse for writing sloppy code. Sure it is.
>in fact sometimes I get the distinct impression you don't actually
>test any of this stuff that you propose. *shrugs*
The examples I provided (outside of the excerpt from your decompiled flash
file) are munged snippets from working code. I'm sorry you can't get
something as simple as that to work. Perhaps a web search on regex would
help? That or you could always stick with your if/then/else/loop ad
nauseum. Makes no matter to me. *shrug*
--
"We are all in the gutter. But some of us are looking at the stars." --
Oscar Wilde
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|