zero-copy API

[Nick Sabalausky]

"BCS" <none at anon.com> wrote in message 
news:a6268ff1e8698cd3c49a2116a7c at news.digitalmars.com...
> Hello Eric,
>
>> On 10/14/2010 8:24 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 15 Oct 2010 03:06:18 +0300, Nick Sabalausky <a at a.a> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "File" menu's greyed out and don't work.
>>>>
>>> Turn on JavaScript. :D
>>>
>>> *ducks*
>>>
>> I wish I had a dollar for every time Nick finds something on the web
>> that doesn't work without JavaScript :)
>>

Heh :)

But it's actually kinda surprising just how often I'm able to fudge my way 
through a site that's clearly designed for JS-only even without actually 
turning JS on. Rank-and-file web devs often seriously underestimate just how 
much can be done, and done rather easily and to good effect, without a 
single line of in-browser scripting like JS or Flash.

Fairly recent example: A guy I've been doing some web work for sent me some 
page prototypes. They had graphic-link buttons with rollover effects and a 
data-submission form. The link rollovers were done in JS (auto-generated by 
Dreamweaver - yea, "ick"), and the data-submission form was done in Flash 
(Is there anything Adobe *can* do right?).

I kinda balked at it, but he didn't see anything wrong with it. So I started 
from scratch, redid the rollovers in CSS2 (and you probably already know 
what I think of CSS ;) ), and redid the form in HTML. Took mere minutes (at 
least those particular parts did - the CSS layout took forever, until I 
decited to toss in a few <table>s). Showed them to him and all of a sudden 
he was thrilled with how much better both of them worked.

And this wasn't another "you'll never pull my 10-year-old 32-bit box even 
from my cold dead hands" guy like me. Quite the opposite - this is one of 
those obessively upgrading "always gotta have the latest and greatest" sorts 
of people, so his hardware performance and software versions were way up 
there and he still noticed a significant improvement.

>
> If you did, you'd have enough money to develop something that wasn't the 
> disaster that JS-in-the-browser turned into.

Now I like that idea!