Hello and welcome to our community! Is this your first visit?
Register
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 18
  1. #1
    New to the CF scene
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    1
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Need Help Javascript functions

    I need help with this function
    I am trying to take in array and output a new Array that filters the old array for elements that contain certain letters. Here's what I have

    names = ["AFGHANISTAN", "ALGERIA", "ARGENTINA", "BANGLADESH", "BRAZIL", "BURMA",
    "CANADA", "CHINA", "COLUMBIA", "CONGO", "EGYPT", "ETHIOPIA", "FRANCE",
    "GERMANY", "GHANA", "INDIA", "INDONESIA", "IRAN", "IRAQ", "ITALY",
    "JAPAN", "KENYA", "MALAYSIA", "MEXICO", "MOROCCO", "NEPAL", "NIGERIA",
    "NORTHKOREA", "PAKISTAN", "PERU", "PHILIPPINES", "POLAND", "RUSSIA",
    "SAUDIARABIA", "SOUTHAFRICA", "SOUTHKOREA", "SPAIN", "SUDAN", "TAIWAN",
    "TANZANIA", "THAILAND", "TURKEY", "UGANDA", "UKRAINE", "UNITEDKINGDOM",
    "UNITEDSTATES", "UZBEKISTAN", "VENEZUELA", "VIETNAM", "YEMEN"];

    function filterByLetter(originalList, letter){
    originalList=names;
    counter=0
    for(var i=0;i<originalList.length;i++){

    }
    if( originalList.indexOf(letter)= -1){


    }

    }

  • #2
    Master Coder felgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    6,642
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 649 Times in 639 Posts
    In modern browsers that support the Array filter method you could use:

    Code:
    names = ["AFGHANISTAN", "ALGERIA", "ARGENTINA", "BANGLADESH", "BRAZIL", "BURMA",
     "CANADA", "CHINA", "COLUMBIA", "CONGO", "EGYPT", "ETHIOPIA", "FRANCE",
     "GERMANY", "GHANA", "INDIA", "INDONESIA", "IRAN", "IRAQ", "ITALY",
     "JAPAN", "KENYA", "MALAYSIA", "MEXICO", "MOROCCO", "NEPAL", "NIGERIA",
     "NORTHKOREA", "PAKISTAN", "PERU", "PHILIPPINES", "POLAND", "RUSSIA",
     "SAUDIARABIA", "SOUTHAFRICA", "SOUTHKOREA", "SPAIN", "SUDAN", "TAIWAN",
     "TANZANIA", "THAILAND", "TURKEY", "UGANDA", "UKRAINE", "UNITEDKINGDOM",
     "UNITEDSTATES", "UZBEKISTAN", "VENEZUELA", "VIETNAM", "YEMEN"];
    
     function filterByLetter(originalList, letter){
     return originalList.filter(function(x) {return x.indexOf(letter)===-1;});
     }
    
    alert(filterByLetter(names,'Y'));
    see https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/...s/Array/filter for details of this call and also for code you can add to implement it for older browsers that would not otherwise support it.
    Stephen
    Learn Modern JavaScript - http://javascriptexample.net/
    Helping others to solve their computer problem at http://www.felgall.com/

    Don't forget to start your JavaScript code with "use strict"; which makes it easier to find errors in your code.

  • #3
    Supreme Master coder! Old Pedant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    27,664
    Thanks
    80
    Thanked 4,641 Times in 4,603 Posts
    In any case, this will never work:
    Code:
    if( originalList.indexOf(letter)= -1){
    In JavaScript (and in Java and C and C++ and C# and ...) = is *ALWAYS* an ASSIGNMENT operator. It is *NOT* used to test a value.
    An optimist sees the glass as half full.
    A pessimist sees the glass as half empty.
    A realist drinks it no matter how much there is.

  • #4
    Senior Coder rnd me's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Urbana
    Posts
    4,461
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked 600 Times in 580 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by felgall View Post
    In modern browsers that support the Array filter method you could use
    you can omit return and function by using the native regexp method test():

    Code:
    names = ["AFGHANISTAN", "ALGERIA", "ARGENTINA", "BANGLADESH", "BRAZIL", "BURMA",
    "CANADA", "CHINA", "COLUMBIA", "CONGO", "EGYPT", "ETHIOPIA", "FRANCE",
    "GERMANY", "GHANA", "INDIA", "INDONESIA", "IRAN", "IRAQ", "ITALY",
    "JAPAN", "KENYA", "MALAYSIA", "MEXICO", "MOROCCO", "NEPAL", "NIGERIA",
    "NORTHKOREA", "PAKISTAN", "PERU", "PHILIPPINES", "POLAND", "RUSSIA",
    "SAUDIARABIA", "SOUTHAFRICA", "SOUTHKOREA", "SPAIN", "SUDAN", "TAIWAN",
    "TANZANIA", "THAILAND", "TURKEY", "UGANDA", "UKRAINE", "UNITEDKINGDOM",
    "UNITEDSTATES", "UZBEKISTAN", "VENEZUELA", "VIETNAM", "YEMEN"];
    
    function filterByLetter(originalList, letter){
     return originalList.filter(/./.test, RegExp(letter));
    } 
    
    
    filterByLetter(names, "U");

    the pattern is not only less typing, it executes faster without the function call and closure overhead.


    if you couldn't use a regexp method (an array of objects for example), it's better to use this instead of a closure:
    Code:
    function filterByLetter(originalList, letter){
     return originalList.filter(function(x) {return x.indexOf(this)===-1;}, letter);
     }
    since functions need this anyway, avoiding the extra outside closure in the looped function can help the VM execute the code body faster.
    the difference is that the version above is a pure function, which is easier to optimize.

    it also means we can breakup the loop code and maybe re-use it later.
    the filter function is really examining something for something else, let's call it contains():
    Code:
    function contains(x) {return x.indexOf(this)===-1;}
    
    function hasLetter(originalList, letter){
       return originalList.filter(contains, letter);
    }
    
    function hasClass(elm, strClassName){
     return contains.call( strClassName, elm.className);
    }
    by making the logic pure, contains() can pull double duty for the hasLetter() and hasClass() method.
    we could also .filter[] an exploded classList, but i wanted to show a call example.
    silly examples perhaps, but i hope to have made the point...
    Last edited by rnd me; 12-01-2012 at 01:06 PM.
    my site (updated 2014/10/20)
    BROWSER STATS [% share] (2014/9/03) IE7:0.1, IE8:4.3, IE11:9.2, IE9:2.7, IE10:2.6, FF:16.8, CH:47.5, SF:7.8, NON-MOUSE:37%

  • #5
    Supreme Master coder! Philip M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    18,310
    Thanks
    203
    Thanked 2,563 Times in 2,541 Posts
    Can I point out that North Korea, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, United States and United Kingdom are so spelled with spaces?

    We have had similar homework at http://www.codingforums.com/showthread.php?t=281661

    As this is plainly homework here is no point in offering the OP (this is his first post here) advanced/sophisticated solutions. Teacher may be dim, but not so dim as not to suspect external help!

    Code:
    <script type = "text/javascript">
    
    var names = ["AFGHANISTAN", "ALGERIA", "ARGENTINA", "BANGLADESH", "BRAZIL", "BURMA",
    "CANADA", "CHINA", "COLUMBIA", "CONGO", "EGYPT", "ETHIOPIA", "FRANCE",
    "GERMANY", "GHANA", "INDIA", "INDONESIA", "IRAN", "IRAQ", "ITALY",
    "JAPAN", "KENYA", "MALAYSIA", "MEXICO", "MOROCCO", "NEPAL", "NIGERIA",
    "NORTH KOREA", "PAKISTAN", "PERU", "PHILIPPINES", "POLAND", "RUSSIA",
    "SAUDI ARABIA", "SOUTH AFRICA", "SOUTH KOREA", "SPAIN", "SUDAN", "TAIWAN",
    "TANZANIA", "THAILAND", "TURKEY", "UGANDA", "UKRAINE", "UNITED KINGDOM",
    "UNITED STATES", "UZBEKISTAN", "VENEZUELA", "VIETNAM", "YEMEN"];
    
    function filterByLetter(letter) {
    
    var letter = letter.toUpperCase();
    var counter = 0;
    var results = [];
    
    for(var i=0; i<names.length; i++) {
    if (names[i].indexOf(letter)>=0) {  // -1 means the letter was NOT found
    results[counter] = names [i];
    counter ++;
    }
    }
    
    var final = results.join("\n");
    alert ("The letter " + letter + " was found in the following " + counter + " country names\n\n" + final)
    }
    
    filterByLetter("u");
    filterByLetter(" ");
    
    
    </script>
    Last edited by Philip M; 12-02-2012 at 11:17 AM.

    All the code given in this post has been tested and is intended to address the question asked.
    Unless stated otherwise it is not just a demonstration.

  • #6
    Master Coder felgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    6,642
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 649 Times in 639 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Philip M View Post
    As this is plainly homework here is no point in offering the OP (this is his first post here) advanced/sophisticated solutions. Teacher may be dim, but not so dim as not to suspect external help!
    Obviously the student can't hand in a real world solution to the problem in this type of situation since the real world solution uses commands that haven't been taught yet.

    I disagree that there is no point in offering such solutions though.

    1. The particular problem is one where there is a far better solution that the one the teacher expects so the particular question being asked is not one for which the code the teacher expects to be used in the answer would normally be used. (Why can't the teachers ask questions where the code being tested is appropriate to use for the solution?) So the student will know which way to go in trying to solve similar problems in the real world after they finish their course.

    2. The person asking the question (and their fellow students) are not the only people who will ever be looking for solutions to that type of problem. By providing a real world solution those who are not students who have a similar problem they need to solve will see how to do it properly.

    3. Those answering the question can improve their JavaScript skills when others offer an improvement on their solution.

    Admittedly none of those get the student closer to being able to provide the answer that their dim teacher expects and so it is also necessary to provide advice as to how they should go about fixing the code they ask about in the first place. With the knowledge that such a solution is a long way from being the best way to solve that particular problem and that their teacher did not present them with a problem where the code that they are supposed to know would be the appropriate way to solve it.
    Last edited by felgall; 12-02-2012 at 07:47 PM.
    Stephen
    Learn Modern JavaScript - http://javascriptexample.net/
    Helping others to solve their computer problem at http://www.felgall.com/

    Don't forget to start your JavaScript code with "use strict"; which makes it easier to find errors in your code.

  • #7
    Supreme Master coder! Philip M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    18,310
    Thanks
    203
    Thanked 2,563 Times in 2,541 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by felgall View Post
    I disagree that there is no point in offering such solutions though.
    I said "there is no point in offering the OP (this is his first post here) advanced/sophisticated solutions."

    If he had only the posts in this thread previous to mine to work with, he has not advanced at all in his homework - which you seem to agree.

    You are, of course, right that the more sophisticated scripts may (doubless will) be of value to others. But they do not really answer the chap's question.

    As so often, I do not consider the fact that one function might execute faster than another to be of the slightest importance when that difference is not discernable. I am not a fanatic - by which I mean a person who insists on very strict standards and shows little tolerance for contrary ideas or opinions. I am a pragmatist - if it works and meets the requirement it will do fine. As Voltaire said, "The best is the enemy of the good". I do not believe in the policy "Never use 10 words where 50 will do", nor "Never use a simple tool where an elaborate one will do". I am not at all sure why your or rnd me's solutions (which are, of course, perfectly valid) are supposed to "better" or "real world". As we often say, there is more than one way to skin a cat.

    While many people are still using older browsers, it is pointless to code in such a way that it works only in browsers which support HTML5. In a few year's time - perhaps.
    Last edited by Philip M; 12-02-2012 at 08:19 PM. Reason: Typo

    All the code given in this post has been tested and is intended to address the question asked.
    Unless stated otherwise it is not just a demonstration.

  • #8
    Master Coder felgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    6,642
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 649 Times in 639 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Philip M View Post
    While many people are still using older browsers, it is pointless to code in such a way that it works only in browsers which support HTML5. In a few year's time - perhaps.
    That comment is completely irrelevant to this particular situation as there is nothing that has been discussed here that is limited to browsers that support HTML 5. In any case support or otherwise for HTML 5 has nothing to do with JavaScript.

    In the first post I made where I referenced filter() as the obvious solution to this particular problem I also included a link to a page that displays the code needed to implement it for ALL browsers that support JavaScript. So in browsers that support modern JavaScript the call would use the native filter method built into the browser and for browsers that only support antiquated JavaScript the additional code to define the filter method within the script itself would run.

    Any of the posted solutions using filter will therefore work in all browsers currently in use and not just those that support the latest version of JavaScript.

    Also by viewing the code needed to implement filter in browsers still using antiquated versions of JavaScript anyone can see how to implement a loop to iterate over an array so as to perform processing on each element. Even a beginner would be able to identify how to define a loop to iterate over an array from that code - which is half of the solution they need.

    Also while HTML 5 is still at an early draft stage, the modern JavaScript version that includes the filter method became the official JavaScript standard back in 2011 and so filter is a standard JavaScript method.

    Anyway the wording of this particular question is such that it probably originated as one intended to find out whether the person recognised that the filter method is the solution to such problems - what the problem asks you to do matches so closely to what the filter function is designed to do that it makes no sense to use the problem for anything else other than to test if the person knows about filter. Using the problem that way would make any answer that doesn't use filter wrong.


    I mostly agree with you about execution speed. Readability of the code so as to make it easier to maintain is far more important and will save far more time than using more convoluted code that results in a minor speed increase. Where there are two alternatives for coding that are equally readable and where one is faster than the other then it makes sense to choose the faster alternative as the way you write your code. Where the faster version also results in shorter and more readable code then that becomes the obvious choice.
    Last edited by felgall; 12-02-2012 at 09:59 PM.
    Stephen
    Learn Modern JavaScript - http://javascriptexample.net/
    Helping others to solve their computer problem at http://www.felgall.com/

    Don't forget to start your JavaScript code with "use strict"; which makes it easier to find errors in your code.

  • #9
    Supreme Master coder! Philip M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    18,310
    Thanks
    203
    Thanked 2,563 Times in 2,541 Posts
    filter is a JavaScript extension to the ECMA-262 standard; as such it may not be present in other implementations of the standard.

    It beats me why anyone would want to use the "workaround" filter code to cater for older browsers when the same result can be achieved in a few lines of "antiquated" Javascript code. Seems to me to be a fine example of "Never use 5 lines of code where 20 will do".

    Glad you agree that readabilty of code is more important than trivial improvements in execution speed.

    All the code given in this post has been tested and is intended to address the question asked.
    Unless stated otherwise it is not just a demonstration.

  • #10
    Senior Coder rnd me's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Urbana
    Posts
    4,461
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked 600 Times in 580 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Philip M View Post
    I am not at all sure why your or rnd me's solutions (which are, of course, perfectly valid) are supposed to "better" or "real world". As we often say, there is more than one way to skin a cat.

    While many people are still using older browsers, it is pointless to code in such a way that it works only in browsers which support HTML5. In a few year's time - perhaps.
    1. i usually go by K.I.S.S, Occam's razor, etc. JS often rewards simple code with fast execution. i think my code is dead-simple to read: you name a function, regexp's test() method, and you name the property to test for, and it returns a new list of the list items passing your specifications. How it gets any simpler than that, i can't imagine. i don't think introducing variables where they need not be used reduces complexity. In CS terms, variables and loops adds complexity...


    2. i would argue that it's certainly not pointless to the 90% of devices that my code runs upon out-of-the-box. if you wait a few years to start implementing "HTML5" (whatever that even means), you are going to get impossibly behind; we are over the hump of the roller coaster, rapidly accelerating as we descend. i'm constantly struggling to keep up, at least since this summer. when it rains, it pours.

    Some of the new stuff is complicated (indexeddb, webRTC, webAudioAPI, DnD, etc), and some of it is dead-simple (localStorage, classList, dataset, cors, html5 form attribs, typedArrays, FileReader, etc). The complicated stuff is still up in the air, but at least 75% of the simple stuff is available to 75% of surfers off the shelf, and 75% of the rest can be poly-filled. that's being conservative btw.

    Now that IE is live-updated, it's game over, we're circling in on virtual perfection, not spinning off on wild one-browser tangents like we were just a couple years ago. refer to caniuse; it's doesn't appear to me that much else of anything worth a $%$# is going to enter the pipe not next year, or the year after that, but 2 years? that's crazy talk. M$ may change their mind about a few things here and there, and i hope they do on RTC codecs, but most of the cats are out of the bag.



    The species that thrive in the long run are not the strongest, fastest, or smartest; they are the creatures most adaptable to change.
    Last edited by rnd me; 12-03-2012 at 08:57 AM.
    my site (updated 2014/10/20)
    BROWSER STATS [% share] (2014/9/03) IE7:0.1, IE8:4.3, IE11:9.2, IE9:2.7, IE10:2.6, FF:16.8, CH:47.5, SF:7.8, NON-MOUSE:37%

  • #11
    Supreme Master coder! Philip M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    18,310
    Thanks
    203
    Thanked 2,563 Times in 2,541 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by rnd me View Post
    1. i usually go by K.I.S.S, Occam's razor, etc. JS often rewards simple code with fast execution. i think my code is dead-simple to read: you name a function, regexp's test() method, and you name the property to test for, and it returns a new list of the list items passing your specifications. How it gets any simpler than that, i can't imagine. i don't think introducing variables where they need not be used reduces complexity. In CS terms, variables and loops adds complexity...
    Yes, I totally agree. But that is useless to the OP who has not learned about regular expressions yet, and can hardly submit your solution to his teacher.

    Quote Originally Posted by rnd me View Post

    The species that thrive in the long run are not the strongest, fastest, or smartest; they are the creatures most adaptable to change.
    What a lovely concept! But I fear that in that case I am doomed. I am like the Republican Senator who when he retired was asked by a reporter "I expect you have seen a lot of changes during your 40 years in the Senate". "Yes", replied the Senator, "and I was opposed to all of them".

    Not true, really, but I confess that I am what the marketing guys call "a late adopter". But I am a rich late-adopter, thanks to 40 years working with computers in business environments. I remember the first 8-inch IBM floppy disk - obviously a gimmick which would not catch on.

    Another way of surviving in the long-term is not to take life too seriously, not to become obsessive about anything, to retain your sense of proportion and sense of humour.
    Last edited by Philip M; 12-03-2012 at 09:19 AM.

    All the code given in this post has been tested and is intended to address the question asked.
    Unless stated otherwise it is not just a demonstration.

  • #12
    Senior Coder rnd me's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Urbana
    Posts
    4,461
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked 600 Times in 580 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Philip M View Post
    filter is a JavaScript extension to the ECMA-262 standard; as such it may not be present in other implementations of the standard.

    It beats me why anyone would want to use the "workaround" filter code to cater for older browsers when the same result can be achieved in a few lines of "antiquated" Javascript code. Seems to me to be a fine example of "Never use 5 lines of code where 20 will do".
    filter() is is ecma 5, and every browser maker supports ecma 5.

    for a small classroom example, you are probably right, there is no glaring superiority to filter() over a procedural loop. When you work on large projects, having such logic named and re-callable pays large dividends by actually lower the line count, making documentation more generic, providing a private scope so that things like setTimeout and event handler behave as expected, providing more opportunity for JITs to re-use byte-code versions of the logic, and by providing more precise error information to firebug/error consoles.

    it also is nice that you can modify crucial joint in your pipes system-wide in one spot, rather than find-and-replacing 10 for loops.


    lastly, i don't think it's an honest comparison to your "5 lines where 20 will do" quip. people like jQuery because "i can do XXX in on line of code!". If you run a trace on jQuery, you'll see it's actually using hundreds of lines of code over thousands of function calls to accomplish that "one line". But does/should the coder care about the work/sweat/tears that others did to build the base of his pyramid? I don't think they do, and according to the developer "it's one line", an assessment i could embrace or shun depending on the wind currents.


    and let's look at the forest, not a single tree:

    let's see which pattern can filter out 100 different array in less code.
    my site (updated 2014/10/20)
    BROWSER STATS [% share] (2014/9/03) IE7:0.1, IE8:4.3, IE11:9.2, IE9:2.7, IE10:2.6, FF:16.8, CH:47.5, SF:7.8, NON-MOUSE:37%

  • #13
    Senior Coder rnd me's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Urbana
    Posts
    4,461
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked 600 Times in 580 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Philip M View Post
    filter is a JavaScript extension to the ECMA-262 standard; as such it may not be present in other implementations of the standard.

    It beats me why anyone would want to use the "workaround" filter code to cater for older browsers when the same result can be achieved in a few lines of "antiquated" Javascript code. Seems to me to be a fine example of "Never use 5 lines of code where 20 will do".
    filter() is is ecma 5, and every browser maker supports ecma 5.

    for a small classroom example, you are probably right, there is no glaring superiority to filter() over a procedural loop. When you work on large projects, having such logic named and re-callable pays large dividends by actually lower the line count, making documentation more generic, providing a private scope so that things like setTimeout and event handler behave as expected, providing more opportunity for JITs to re-use byte-code versions of the logic, and by providing more precise error information to firebug/error consoles.

    it also is nice that you can modify crucial joint in your pipes system-wide in one spot, rather than find-and-replacing 10 for loops.


    lastly, i don't think it's an honest comparison to your "5 lines where 20 will do" quip. people like jQuery because "i can do XXX in on line of code!". If you run a trace on jQuery, you'll see it's actually using hundreds of lines of code over thousands of function calls to accomplish that "one line". But does/should the coder care about the work/sweat/tears that others did to build the base of his pyramid? I don't think they do, and according to the developer "it's one line", an assessment i could embrace or shun depending on the wind currents.


    and let's look at the forest, not a single tree:

    let's see which pattern can filter out 100 different arrays in less code...
    my site (updated 2014/10/20)
    BROWSER STATS [% share] (2014/9/03) IE7:0.1, IE8:4.3, IE11:9.2, IE9:2.7, IE10:2.6, FF:16.8, CH:47.5, SF:7.8, NON-MOUSE:37%

  • #14
    Senior Coder rnd me's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Urbana
    Posts
    4,461
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked 600 Times in 580 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Philip M View Post
    Yes, I totally agree. But that is useless to the OP who has not learned about regular expressions yet, and can hardly submit your solution to his teacher.
    good, F's to all cheaters who rob themselves of the opportunity to actually learn by example .


    Quote Originally Posted by Philip M View Post
    Not true, really, but I confess that I am what the marketing guys call "a late adopter". But I am a rich late-adopter, thanks to 40 years working with computers in business environments. I remember the first 8-inch IBM floppy disk - obviously a gimmick which would not catch on.
    there's hope. we used those 1kb floppys on the mini at my first job. i am not talking about anything made by apple nor something that by any means would be considered mini today; those 220v monsters were bigger than i was! it's not where you start, it's where you end up.

    there's a $%@#% war going on out there, and if you decide to lean up against your rifle and rest on your laurels for some quick shut eye, well, my condolences to your next of kin. i don't want to hear about nerves; get up, get out, and fight: you're on the right side.
    my site (updated 2014/10/20)
    BROWSER STATS [% share] (2014/9/03) IE7:0.1, IE8:4.3, IE11:9.2, IE9:2.7, IE10:2.6, FF:16.8, CH:47.5, SF:7.8, NON-MOUSE:37%

  • #15
    Supreme Master coder! Philip M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    18,310
    Thanks
    203
    Thanked 2,563 Times in 2,541 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by rnd me View Post
    there's a $%@#% war going on out there, and if you decide to lean up against your rifle and rest on your laurels for some quick shut eye, well, my condolences to your next of kin. i don't want to hear about nerves; get up, get out, and fight: you're on the right side.
    I have always considered that one of the greatest advantages of my birth date is that I was too young to fight in the last war, and am too old to fight in the next.
    "He who fights and runs away ......"
    Last edited by Philip M; 12-03-2012 at 10:42 AM.

    All the code given in this post has been tested and is intended to address the question asked.
    Unless stated otherwise it is not just a demonstration.


  •  
    Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •