|
I agree. That is why I also agree with the original poster that a JavaScript month should not be starting with zero. I was just trying to say that, if one is being aggravatingly dumb, at least be consistent about it. I wonder just who it was who made the decision to make months start with zero, and what he is doing now. Is he sitting in an easy chair with his tea and crumpets, musing about his wonderful history, or is he hiding in a safehouse in fear from those of us who didn't like his work.
|
|
|
|
|
He's probably fixing broken VB code.
At least that's the punishment I'd come up with.
|
|
|
|
|
Wasn't Javascript born out of C/C++? Then, that is why lists and arrays begin at 0 and not 1.
|
|
|
|
|
Y...yes...?
I don't think I was questioning this.
|
|
|
|
|
The method is deprecated, but try mydate.getYear() sometime
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
My favorite Javascript date "feature" is where Jan 32, 2015 rather than throwing an error will just assume you meant Feb 1, 2015.
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps you don't like zero-base array. Perhaps Pascal/Delphi suits you better? It is the only language with 1 base array I know off.
|
|
|
|
|
Isn't BASIC 1-index too?
And I'm quite happy with 0-based arrays. However, a month number is not an index. It is a human-readable abstraction starting with "1". Therefore, when I ask for the month in Javascript, I do NOT expect to get 0 for January.
By Javascript's logic, the first day of the month should be 0!!!!
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
It's nice when the boss's boss takes you out for breakfast. One of the benefits of being the first two people at the office.
|
|
|
|
|
better if it is the boss's wife !! (OH WAIT!!! )
I'd rather be phishing!
|
|
|
|
|
The boss and the boss's boss can't be female? They weren't.
|
|
|
|
|
You don't like the wife of a female boss's boss, do you?
|
|
|
|
|
One step towards becoming your boss' peer!
|
|
|
|
|
There ain't no such thing as a free breakfast!
|
|
|
|
|
Breakfast is lots of coffee and cigarette's. In the dark, without sound, without other people.
I don't think my boss would appreciate it.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Good chance to say anything against the Boss
|
|
|
|
|
As the saying goes, "the early developer gets the bacon.".
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
Eggs, ham, and veggies omelette in this case.
|
|
|
|
|
Bassam Abdul-Baki wrote: ham
Darn near as yummy!
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm more up for this[^]
if(this.signature != "")
{
MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}
|
|
|
|
|
I suggest we don't all try to download it on the same day, surely if we do the Internet will break.
|
|
|
|
|
If it's as poorly implemented as VS2015, I'm not so sure. Man, that SPOCS* is bug ridden.
*Steaming Pile Of Crud Spittle.
|
|
|
|
|
What surprised me is the number of crashes in 2015 - I had no that problem while beta testing...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: If it's as poorly implemented as VS2015
If you are telling me that VS2015 is crap, then I am definitely not going to install it.
I have already received my MSDN subscription email that I can download it - no thank you; I don't need the headache.
|
|
|
|