Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Lines numbers in error report seem to be off in latest version

Expand Messages
  • cse_html_validator
    ... Well this is unfortunate. I updated am am getting reports of line # s being off. I d like to keep using JSLint, but I m not sure if I can continue to do so
    Message 1 of 16 , Mar 29, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      > This is due to a bug in JScript. The bug has been there for well over a decade.
      >
      > I have adopted a pledge to no longer work around Microsoft's bugs. The ultimate result of those workarounds is that Microsoft is under no pressure to ever fix them.
      >
      > So until Microsoft acts, I recommend that you not use JScript or WSH. Nodejs is an excellent alternative.

      Well this is unfortunate. I updated am am getting reports of line #'s being off.

      I'd like to keep using JSLint, but I'm not sure if I can continue to do so it doesn't generate correct line numbers, regardless of the source of the problem.

      What is the latest version that I can get that still generates correct line numbers with WSH?
    • cse_html_validator
      ... Or can the fix be put back in? I think that having to use the fix is unfortunate, but practicality would be on the side of working around MS bugs that are
      Message 2 of 16 , Mar 29, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "cse_html_validator" <alhome@...> wrote:
        > What is the latest version that I can get that still generates correct line numbers with WSH?

        Or can the fix be put back in?

        I think that having to use the fix is unfortunate, but practicality would be on the side of working around MS bugs that are unlikely to get fixed.
      • Sean Kelly
        You might look at node.js This has become my go to solution for running JavaScript locally. While it is designed to run really awesome web servers, and
        Message 3 of 16 , Mar 29, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          You might look at node.js This has become my "go to" solution for running
          JavaScript locally. While it is designed to run really awesome web servers,
          and indeed it does. It also has locally run tools like coffee-script, less,
          uglifyjs and jslint! Not only that but unlike WSH, it works on Windows, Mac
          and Linux. It also has a built in package manager so once you install node
          and add it to your path, you can install jslint with the following command.

          npm install jslint -g

          then to run jslint from the command line

          jslint mycode.js

          SeanK


          On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 11:05 AM, cse_html_validator <alhome@...>wrote:

          > **
          >
          >
          > > This is due to a bug in JScript. The bug has been there for well over a
          > decade.
          > >
          > > I have adopted a pledge to no longer work around Microsoft's bugs. The
          > ultimate result of those workarounds is that Microsoft is under no pressure
          > to ever fix them.
          > >
          > > So until Microsoft acts, I recommend that you not use JScript or WSH.
          > Nodejs is an excellent alternative.
          >
          > Well this is unfortunate. I updated am am getting reports of line #'s
          > being off.
          >
          > I'd like to keep using JSLint, but I'm not sure if I can continue to do so
          > it doesn't generate correct line numbers, regardless of the source of the
          > problem.
          >
          > What is the latest version that I can get that still generates correct
          > line numbers with WSH?
          >
          >
          >


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • cse_html_validator
          ... Thanks. I looked at it briefly, but I need an equivalent replacement for the code I posted in Is there a node.js equivalent for wsh.js? . If I can get
          Message 4 of 16 , Mar 30, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, Sean Kelly <home@...> wrote:
            >
            > You might look at node.js This has become my "go to" solution for running
            > JavaScript locally.

            Thanks. I looked at it briefly, but I need an equivalent replacement for the code I posted in "Is there a node.js equivalent for wsh.js?". If I can get that, then I may switch, especially if it's faster or lighter weight than using WSH (which I suspect it is).
          • mariana.schiff
            I modified the wsh.js code to, basically, put the fix back in. Replace the line source = file.ReadAll(); with the following: source = File.ReadAll()
            Message 5 of 16 , Apr 4 7:41 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              I modified the wsh.js code to, basically, put "the fix" back in.

              Replace the line

              source = file.ReadAll();

              with the following:

              source = File.ReadAll()
              .replace(/\r\n/g, '\n')
              .replace(/\r/g, '\n')
              .split('\n');

              I hope it makes sense. It works well for us.

              --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "cse_html_validator" <alhome@...> wrote:
              >
              >
              >
              > --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, Sean Kelly <home@> wrote:
              > >
              > > You might look at node.js This has become my "go to" solution for running
              > > JavaScript locally.
              >
              > Thanks. I looked at it briefly, but I need an equivalent replacement for the code I posted in "Is there a node.js equivalent for wsh.js?". If I can get that, then I may switch, especially if it's faster or lighter weight than using WSH (which I suspect it is).
              >
            • Sean Kelly
              OK, I updated the page, let me know if it looks right. On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 7:41 AM, mariana.schiff ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              Message 6 of 16 , Apr 4 10:43 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                OK, I updated the page, let me know if it looks right.

                On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 7:41 AM, mariana.schiff
                <Mariana.Schiff@...>wrote:

                > **
                >
                >
                > I modified the wsh.js code to, basically, put "the fix" back in.
                >
                > Replace the line
                >
                > source = file.ReadAll();
                >
                > with the following:
                >
                > source = File.ReadAll()
                > .replace(/\r\n/g, '\n')
                > .replace(/\r/g, '\n')
                > .split('\n');
                >
                > I hope it makes sense. It works well for us.
                >
                > --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "cse_html_validator" <alhome@...>
                > wrote:
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, Sean Kelly <home@> wrote:
                > > >
                > > > You might look at node.js This has become my "go to" solution for
                > running
                > > > JavaScript locally.
                > >
                > > Thanks. I looked at it briefly, but I need an equivalent replacement for
                > the code I posted in "Is there a node.js equivalent for wsh.js?". If I can
                > get that, then I may switch, especially if it's faster or lighter weight
                > than using WSH (which I suspect it is).
                > >
                >
                >
                >


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • mariana.schiff
                Looks great (I had misspelled file ). Thanks for the credit, Mariana
                Message 7 of 16 , Apr 4 10:51 AM
                • 0 Attachment
                  Looks great (I had misspelled 'file').

                  Thanks for the credit,

                  Mariana

                  --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, Sean Kelly <home@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > OK, I updated the page, let me know if it looks right.
                  >
                  > On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 7:41 AM, mariana.schiff
                  > <Mariana.Schiff@...>wrote:
                  >
                  > > **
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > I modified the wsh.js code to, basically, put "the fix" back in.
                  > >
                  > > Replace the line
                  > >
                  > > source = file.ReadAll();
                  > >
                  > > with the following:
                  > >
                  > > source = File.ReadAll()
                  > > .replace(/\r\n/g, '\n')
                  > > .replace(/\r/g, '\n')
                  > > .split('\n');
                  > >
                  > > I hope it makes sense. It works well for us.
                  > >
                  > > --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, "cse_html_validator" <alhome@>
                  > > wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > --- In jslint_com@yahoogroups.com, Sean Kelly <home@> wrote:
                  > > > >
                  > > > > You might look at node.js This has become my "go to" solution for
                  > > running
                  > > > > JavaScript locally.
                  > > >
                  > > > Thanks. I looked at it briefly, but I need an equivalent replacement for
                  > > the code I posted in "Is there a node.js equivalent for wsh.js?". If I can
                  > > get that, then I may switch, especially if it's faster or lighter weight
                  > > than using WSH (which I suspect it is).
                  > > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  >
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.