[Javascript] combining Javascript & VBscript

[davecline at onebox.com]

JavaScript is so much more versatile than VBScript.

For instance...

Object creation:
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
function createCurlyTestA(){
 return {
  id:"curlyTestA",
  name:"Full Name of curlyTestA",
  version: 1,
  arrayTest:["arrayItem1","arrayItem2","arrayItem3"],
  methods:{
   "method1":{id:"method1",creationTime:new Date().getTime()},
   "method2":{id:"method2",creationTime:new Date().getTime()},
   "method3":{id:"method2",creationTime:new Date().getTime()}
  }
 }
}

Object inheritance:
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
function bug(){
  this.food=10;
  this.eat = function(){this.food--;};
  this.toString = function(){return "Food remaining:" + this.food;};
}
function beetle(){}
beetle.prototype = new bug();
beetle.eat()
alert(beetle.toString());

OR

var x
for (x in bug.prototype)
  beetle.prototype=x;

And the way you can dynamically create new properties/function/objects from text...
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
This code take any XML file and turns it into a complete javascript object hierarchy.
as in:
<root>
  <bugs>
    <beetle name="barney" />
    <ant name="arny" />
  </bugs>
</root>

would become:
root.bugs[0].beetle.name = barney
root.bugs[1].ant.name = arny

http://www.bangeye.com/xtesting/XmlToJavaScriptObjects.html

It also transfers back a javascript hierarchy into an XML document.

All with JavaScript - very versatile.

-- 
Dave Cline
davecline at onebox.com
www.bangeye.com/




-----Original Message-----
From:     Peter Brunone <peter at brunone.com>
Sent:     Wed, 31 Mar 2004 22:20:53 -0600
To:       "'[JavaScript List]'" <javascript at LaTech.edu>
Subject:  RE: [Javascript] combining Javascript & VBscript


	That's the nice thing about variants.  If you suddenly assign it
to an array, it's an array, e.g.

myString = Split(myString, "|")

Convenient, but probably not the most efficient use of resources :-D

	As for "freeing" string vars and such, you can set them equal to
Nothing; I don't know what the Javascript equivalent would be.

-----Original Message-----
From: javascript-bounces at LaTech.edu On Behalf Of David Lovering

I was thinking particularly of "freeing" a variable by deleting it,
although the other discussion is starting to turn out to be more
interesting.  Also, I can think of a few bizarro situations where a
single variable might suddenly need to become an array, or vice-versa.
That's hard to do without a "new Array()" or something similar.

However, I'll defer to the other list readers.  My peculiar interests in
pure OOL stuff does not (as yet) have any direct bearing on Javascript.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chris T" <christ at saeweb.com>

> VBScript (and JavaScript) uses Variants though. So you don't have to
define
> variables as types.  Why would there be a need to redefine it a second
time?
> Just set the variable if you want to change it's value type.
>
> Chris Tifer
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Lovering" <dlovering at gazos.com>
>
> > Well, some might say that redefining a variable (either by value, or

> > by
> > type) might be useful, just as redefining an array might be.  If
VBScript
> > doesn't support that in some fashion, I'd say it has a serious 
> > problem.
> >
> > -- Dave Lovering
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Paul Novitski" <paul at dandemutande.org>
> >
> > > One serious advantage VBscript has over Javascript is the 
> > > enforcement
of
> > > unique variable names.  Accidentally naming two variables the same

> > > can cause problems that are hair-pullingly difficult to detect & 
> > > debug in
a
> > > complex application.
> > >
> > > Javascript blithely allows:
> > >
> > >          var thingie = "a";
> > >          var thingie = "b";
> > >
> > > whereas VB chokes on:
> > >
> > >          dim thingie
> > >          dim thingie
> > >
> > > and generates a runtime (compile) error "Name redefined".
> > >
> > > Alas, neither script seems to enforce uniqueness of function 
> > > names,
> taking
> > > (in my experience) the last instance of a function as the one to 
> > > run
> when
> > > it's called.
> > >
> > > Paul
> > >
> > > At 10:28 AM 3/30/2004, Chris T wrote:
> > > > > for example Javascript's string methods or, gosh, I don't 
> > > > > know, maybe VBscript's high-level date & time formatting.
> > > >
> > > >That seems to be the biggest reason to want to do it. If you're 
> > > >going straight VBScript, you will be limited in that you can't 
> > > >get
> Milliseconds
> > > >I don't believe, but JS can do that.
> > > >
> > > >And like you said, the built-in formatting of dates is probably 
> > > >superior  in VBScript.
> > > >
> > > >Chris Tifer


_______________________________________________
Javascript mailing list
Javascript at LaTech.edu
https://lists.LaTech.edu/mailman/listinfo/javascript