OT：orkut.com的问题 [英] OT: problems with orkut.com
问题描述
嗨
我知道，很多人都有orkut.com的问题，
错误，比如对象预期等和命名对象丢失。当加载
时，该网站可能会产生10个错误，并且仍然只留下一个蓝页
- 似乎它很大程度上依赖于JS。
不过，我和有问题的朋友和orkut似乎只是忽略了它。
我相信，其他人有问题，我真的很想知道是什么
有点问题。
奇怪的是，它有效，有些地方有效 - 想想
问题在于我的电脑。
其次，在groups.google.com上使用我的工作电子邮件，然后转到
orkut，然后就可以了。接下来，我退出，然后使用我的私人
电子邮件，我得到一个蓝页。虽然，到目前为止，这不起作用。
这让我相信，它是我的
配置文件中包含JS的一部分，它失败了很多。因此，问题出现在他们的脚本中。
这让我想起曾经有过我的网站的问题，其中
包括.js文件没有适当的权限，也无法加载
。
有没有人一直在想这个和糟糕的JS编码？
对我而言，orkut是一个如何不完全依赖页面的例子
JS。
WBR
Sonnich
Hi
I know, that there are a lot of people having problems with orkut.com,
errors like "object expected" and named objects missing. When loading
the site can generate some 10 errors, and still just leave a blue page
- seems like it heavily rely on JS.
Still, me and friends having problems and orkut seems just to ignore
it.
I am sure, that other poeple have problems, and I really wonder what
kind of problem it is.
The odd thing is, that it works some times, someplaces - makes think
the problem is in my computer.
Secondly, when using my work email on groups.google.com, then going to
orkut, then it works. Next, I sign out, and then in using my private
email, and I get a blue page. Though, as of now, that does not work.
This makes me believe, that it is some part of included JS for my
profile, which fails heavily. Hence, the problem is in their scripts.
This reminds me of a problem I once had with a site of mine, where the
included .js file did not have proper permissions and could not be
loaded.
Have anyone been thinking about this and bad JS coding in general?
To me, orkut is an example of how pages should not rely entirely on
JS.
WBR
Sonnich
推荐答案
9月23日下午4:07，jodleren写道：
On Sep 23, 4:07 pm, jodleren wrote:
我知道，有很多人有问题
orkut.com，
< snip>
我相信，其他人有问题，我真的很想知道它是什么样的问题。
I know, that there are a lot of people having problems with
orkut.com,
<snip>
I am sure, that other poeple have problems, and I really
wonder what kind of problem it is.
< snip>
如果是Google那么它必须是无能的。
<snip>
If its Google then it must be incompetence.
Henry写道：
Henry wrote:
9月23日下午4:07，jodleren写道：
On Sep 23, 4:07 pm, jodleren wrote:
>我知道，很多人都有问题orkut.com，
< snip>
我相信，其他人有问题，我真的很想知道它是什么样的问题。
>I know, that there are a lot of people having problems with
orkut.com,
<snip>
I am sure, that other poeple have problems, and I really
wonder what kind of problem it is.
< snip>
如果是Google那么它必须是无能的。
<snip>
If its Google then it must be incompetence.
/ *讽刺模式* /
是的，我同意。如果有什么东西是微软那么
它必定是无能的。
事实上，在我看来这些公司的每一位员工都是b $ b是无能的，每个人都有成千上万的人，没有例外。
一旦一个人没有受雇于邪恶的公司，
并在clj写帖子，他可能会成为主管，专家，
，前提是他从未为邪恶工作过（希望
永远不会。）
也许因此在这里发布一个真实的
名称是非常重要的，这样即使他们的前雇员也可以被认可为
邪恶，无能的人。
如果一个不称职的谷歌人写道
var i = 1;
然后代码错了，不称职，白痴的工作，表现
是值得怀疑的，并且肯定会有邪恶的灵魂参与
行。
如果是c。 lj专家写道
var i = 1;
然后代码是令人钦佩的，遵循标准，正确贴上
正确的签名和报价，正确的软件和那里
是好的精神，荣耀荣耀halleluja。
我希望有一天我能成为一个这里有专家。
/ *讽刺模式关闭* /
/* satire mode on */
Yes, I agree. And if something is Microsoft then
it must be incompetence.
In fact, in my opinion every employee in those companies
is incompetent, each and everyone of tens of thousands
of people, without an exception.
As soon as a person is not employed by the Evil Companies,
and writes posts in c.l.j, he might become competent, expert,
provided he has never worked for the Evil (and hopefully
never will.)
Perhaps therefore it is very important to post here with one''s real
name so that even their former employees can be recognized as
evil, incompetent people.
If an incompetent Google-person writes
var i = 1;
then the code is wrong, incompetent, idiot''s work, the performance
is questionable, and there are sure to be evil spirits involved in
the lines.
If a c.l.j expert writes
var i = 1;
then the code is admirable, following standards, correctly posted with
correct signature and quotation, with correct software and there
are good spirits in it, glory glory halleluja .
I hope some day I could become an expert here.
/* satire mode off */
2008-09-23 19:44，optimistx写道：
On 2008-09-23 19:44, optimistx wrote:
如果一个不称职的谷歌人写道
var i = 1;
然后代码错了，不称职，白痴的工作，[...]
如果一个clj专家写道
var i = 1;
然后代码令人钦佩[...]
If an incompetent Google-person writes
var i = 1;
then the code is wrong, incompetent, idiot''s work, [...]
If a c.l.j expert writes
var i = 1;
then the code is admirable [...]
第一个变种更适合朝向高性能的b / b
表现至关重要。它牺牲了原始速度的清晰度和可维护性，这在一个每天都有数百万
人访问的网站中是有道理的。
第二种形式更经典;它简单，强大，易于维护和修改，但它也可以作为瓶颈。这是
规范形式。这就是它在独家（以及非常昂贵的）bb b昂贵的精英编程课程中的教学方式，这个小组的许多常客参加了这些课程。就个人而言，我也发现这款风格比谷歌使用的狭窄替代品更优雅。
希望能为你清理它。
下周我们可以讨论i ++之间的区别。
- 康拉德
The first variant is more geared towards situations where high
performance is paramount. It sacrifices clarity and maintainability for
raw speed, which makes sense in a website that''s visited by millions of
people every day.
The second form is more classical; it''s simple, robust, and easy
to maintain and modify, but it can also act as a bottleneck. This is
canonical form. This is how it''s taught in the exclusive (and very
expensive) elite programming courses, which many of the regulars of this
group attended. Personally, I also find the style more elegant compared
to the cramped alternative used by Google.
Hope that cleared it up for you.
Next week we can discuss the difference between i++.
- Conrad
这篇关于OT：orkut.com的问题的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
