CodeProject challenges
-
Why JavaScript? This sort of stuff should be happening on the server(s) right?
.-. |o,o| ,| \_\\=/\_ .-""-. ||/\_/\_\\\_\\ /\[\] \_ \_\\ |\_/|(\_)|\\\\ \_|\_o\_LII|\_ \\.\_./// / | ==== | \\ |\\\_/|"\` |\_| ==== |\_| |\_|\_| ||" || || |-|-| ||LI o || |\_|\_| ||'----'|| /\_/ \\\_\\ /\_\_| |\_\_\\Of course, CP could be moving towards Node.JS - that would be really good :D
-
I'll just write it in Typescript. I've been using it a lot lately, and I like the way it works. It almost makes JavaScript enjoyable.
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
It almost makes JavaScript enjoyable
How can you not love Javascript[^]?
cheers Chris Maunder
-
I've mentioned before an idea I had about getting the smartest and brightest (yeah, that means you lot) to come up with solutions to day to day issues we have that will, ultimately, save the community as a whole some time and pain. A challenge I'm facing at the moment is in correcting grammar and punctuation. Many, many, MANY times I see questions or articles that have things like "i then did" or "im not sure" or the punishable-by-death "ur mileage may vary". Even Sql instead of SQL and Asp.Net instead of ASP.NET keep popping up. Is anyone interested in a challenge to write a Javascript library that will auto-correct bad spelling and punctuation? It'll be a formal contest with prizes (and maybe even some better specs). Yay or nay: any interest?
cheers Chris Maunder
Will there be a nuclear option for the words "codez" and "plz"?
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello[^]
-
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
It almost makes JavaScript enjoyable
How can you not love Javascript[^]?
cheers Chris Maunder
New feature needed, automatically check urls are valid and point to what you are expecting?
-
I am sure you checked out before, but: you should not be the first one to tackle this. Before we reinvent the wheel, is there really nothing out there in the wild interweb that already does the job ?
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus Entropy isn't what it used to.
I have checked. There's stuff that's close. But not as fun as making it perfect ourselves and having an excuse to throw some prizes out... ;)
cheers Chris Maunder
-
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
It almost makes JavaScript enjoyable
How can you not love Javascript[^]?
cheers Chris Maunder
-
...hope it includes an 'off' switch...some of my misspellings are kinda my way of expressing myself, ya know? :)
Definitely
cheers Chris Maunder
-
Just spend some of your petty cash on a commercial license of this http://www.javascriptspellcheck.com/[^], someones done the work already! :)
Dave Find Me On:Web|Facebook|Twitter|LinkedIn Folding Stats: Team CodeProject
I'm not after spell-ckecking - every decent browser already has that. I've after spell fixing. But really, not even spelling: just punctuation and stuff. Light touch to make a big difference.
cheers Chris Maunder
-
Speed: you want it to happen in the client so it's fast (and doesn't stress the servers). Think of the annoying "pauses" you sometimes get when pasting code into a CP textbox, and imagine typing with that going on... X|
You looking for sympathy? You'll find it in the dictionary, between sympathomimetic and sympatric (Page 1788, if it helps)
-
Will there be a nuclear option for the words "codez" and "plz"?
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello[^]
That's actually a required part of the spec.
cheers Chris Maunder
-
Will there be a nuclear option for the words "codez" and "plz"?
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello[^]
-
Hey, you know what we should do?...make a CSharpScript browser plugin to run it 'sorry, no spelling check unless you install the CSharpScript plugin' :)
Trouble is there would have to be at least three of 'em: Chrome, Firefox and Opera. Maybe an IE6 one for the companies that won't let people use a "proper" browser? :laugh:
You looking for sympathy? You'll find it in the dictionary, between sympathomimetic and sympatric (Page 1788, if it helps)
-
I'm not after spell-ckecking - every decent browser already has that. I've after spell fixing. But really, not even spelling: just punctuation and stuff. Light touch to make a big difference.
cheers Chris Maunder
But clearly there is a lack of use by many. At least if there appears to be errors flagged by the JS implementation, you could flag a message "Hey, dunderhead, it looks like you have issues to sort out, fix them before submitting!" :rolleyes:
Dave Find Me On:Web|Facebook|Twitter|LinkedIn Folding Stats: Team CodeProject
-
Trouble is there would have to be at least three of 'em: Chrome, Firefox and Opera. Maybe an IE6 one for the companies that won't let people use a "proper" browser? :laugh:
You looking for sympathy? You'll find it in the dictionary, between sympathomimetic and sympatric (Page 1788, if it helps)
-
I've mentioned before an idea I had about getting the smartest and brightest (yeah, that means you lot) to come up with solutions to day to day issues we have that will, ultimately, save the community as a whole some time and pain. A challenge I'm facing at the moment is in correcting grammar and punctuation. Many, many, MANY times I see questions or articles that have things like "i then did" or "im not sure" or the punishable-by-death "ur mileage may vary". Even Sql instead of SQL and Asp.Net instead of ASP.NET keep popping up. Is anyone interested in a challenge to write a Javascript library that will auto-correct bad spelling and punctuation? It'll be a formal contest with prizes (and maybe even some better specs). Yay or nay: any interest?
cheers Chris Maunder
My voat iz fer a kontezt. Cuz, the codez and kommentz that ppl right should b ur choice 2 regul8, what, az owner of the boardz around hear, though im not sure. Plz consider thiz a YEZ voat, so i then did the rite thing. However, my voat's mileage may vary. ;P
-
I've mentioned before an idea I had about getting the smartest and brightest (yeah, that means you lot) to come up with solutions to day to day issues we have that will, ultimately, save the community as a whole some time and pain. A challenge I'm facing at the moment is in correcting grammar and punctuation. Many, many, MANY times I see questions or articles that have things like "i then did" or "im not sure" or the punishable-by-death "ur mileage may vary". Even Sql instead of SQL and Asp.Net instead of ASP.NET keep popping up. Is anyone interested in a challenge to write a Javascript library that will auto-correct bad spelling and punctuation? It'll be a formal contest with prizes (and maybe even some better specs). Yay or nay: any interest?
cheers Chris Maunder
-
This is a paragraph.
from http://www.w3schools.com/tags/att_global_spellcheck.asp[^]
-
That's actually a required part of the spec.
cheers Chris Maunder
:thumbsup:
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello[^]
-
This is a paragraph.
from http://www.w3schools.com/tags/att_global_spellcheck.asp[^]
It's automatic speech correction that he's after, not spell checking. So, you'd want to correct text speech from things like ur to your.
-
I've mentioned before an idea I had about getting the smartest and brightest (yeah, that means you lot) to come up with solutions to day to day issues we have that will, ultimately, save the community as a whole some time and pain. A challenge I'm facing at the moment is in correcting grammar and punctuation. Many, many, MANY times I see questions or articles that have things like "i then did" or "im not sure" or the punishable-by-death "ur mileage may vary". Even Sql instead of SQL and Asp.Net instead of ASP.NET keep popping up. Is anyone interested in a challenge to write a Javascript library that will auto-correct bad spelling and punctuation? It'll be a formal contest with prizes (and maybe even some better specs). Yay or nay: any interest?
cheers Chris Maunder
Oh, and of your phrase "yeah, that means you lot," it doesn't work. "yeah, that means the lot of you" is more accurate. Though, that may get confused with "yeah, that means allot of you," which implies not the whole "lot of us," of which my using 'the whole "lot"' might further confuse others to discern I mean "a whole lot" which, like "allot of you," doesn't mean the whole "lot of you" that "lot" is describing, which is the whole of us. So, now you (the singular "you," you being the reader, of which, when there is more than a singular "you" reader, collectively, all you readers would also be the "lot of you" readers, though not the lot of you the original "lot of you" denotes) know. :-D
