"Richard Formby" <> wrote in message
news:Sq4Nh.1151$...
> mistral wrote:
>
>> OK, I agree, javascript is not right choice for advanced tasks that
>> required powerful visualization, etc. Its only suitable for poor and
>> primitive tasks, and for newbies. The two aboved samples is just
>> garbage, however, no one will ever use it for web pages. Also, most
>> of this javscripts from this javascript-related websites and
>> depositories is pretty useless for any advanced web development
>> tasks,just collection of various garbage. Most tasks can be done in
>> php. Javascript is old and ineffective.
>
> I await Mr Cornford's reply on this matter, he being in a team that is developing a
> 'something' that includes 7,000, or is it 70,000, lines of javascript 
>
> Hardly "not the right choice for advanced..."
70,000. Which, however, is not indicative of how "advanced" it is, only of how involved
it is, or rather its scale.
I would however also imagine that if Cornford is involved it is not something trivial, or
as small-scale as a typewriter script.
-Lost