• (cs)

    Let's see how many people will comment that they've read these before.

  • Bill Thornton (unregistered)

    How does setting the spacer element's height in the onLoad handler cause this effect: "No matter where the page was scrolled to, the footer always showed up"

    It seems that you would need to make an adjustment every time the page scrolled.

    Unless, of course, you used frames, iframes, or CSS positioning, all of which could achieve the effect without numerous scripting calls.

    ewww is right

  • (cs)

    Haven't I seen this before?

    OMG TDWTF is going to end in a whimper! Aren't there any decent ones left without having to recycle?

    How dare they take vacation!

  • (cs)

    If you don't have an update to post, don't post an update. Posting old news for no reason? WTF?

  • (cs) in reply to skztr
    skztr:
    If you don't have an update to post, don't post an update. Posting old news for no reason? WTF?
    <sarcasm> yeah, that's like if a tv-network would give you a show with clips of old shows, or even just run a show they've done previously. If they don't do it, then why should the dailyWTF? </sarcasm>
  • (cs) in reply to shambo
    shambo:
    Let's see how many people will comment that they've read these before.
    Well, alot more now, thank you very much.

    ahum. <wood> I've read this before. Isn't this old news? </wood>

    ;}

  • Coditor (unregistered)

    What happened? The scheduled new article returned FILE NOT FOUND?

    And what happened to the 50 pixels that were to be substracted from the spacerheight to allow for a 50 pixel footer..?

  • headshit (unregistered)

    can the site be renamed to TheDailyWTF?

  • by by by (unregistered)

    I'd rather read an old post (selected and reposted for me) than have nothing to read at all.

  • Juan O. (unregistered)

    Welcome to CSS...

    .bottomBox { clear:both; bottom: 0%; width:100%; height:25%; padding-top:5px; overflow:hidden; }

  • (cs) in reply to by by by
    by by by:
    I'd rather read an old post (selected and reposted for me) than have nothing to read at all.

    There's a defined interface for that already. Reposts are just useless overload, full of stupid.

    As for the TV metaphor, I can only think of three reasons why that's completely broken and non-applicable.

  • (cs) in reply to TheJasper
    TheJasper:
    skztr:
    If you don't have an update to post, don't post an update. Posting old news for no reason? WTF?
    <sarcasm> yeah, that's like if a tv-network would give you a show with clips of old shows, or even just run a show they've done previously. If they don't do it, then why should the dailyWTF? </sarcasm>

    sarcasm tags are frowned upon here...if the sarcasm is good enough, about 10% of the readers here will get it, the other 90% will obvliously post sardonic replies, and then the original 10% gets all the more satisfaction from it.

  • Nub (unregistered) in reply to shambo

    what if you want it to scroll, eh eh?

  • Rich (unregistered)

    Here's a slightly different take on it... http://www.themaninblue.com/experiment/footerStickAlt/

  • Arioch (unregistered)

    There is a bash.org.ru site, borrowing the idea of bash.org And today it had brought a gem, lost in translation... Erghmmm - better to say "in porting" Guess, before replacing one function with likely-named another one, a coder could look into documentation about parameters meaning, but (remember interview tales?) - it was a bit too much work.

    http://www.online-translator.com/url/tran_url.asp?lang=en&url=http%3A%2F%2Fvnaum.livejournal.com%2F9731.html&direction=re&template=General&cp1=NO&cp2=NO&autotranslate=on&psubmit2.x=42&psubmit2.y=13

    PS: priests are "of Oracle" and eyes are "1px"

  • (cs)

    The Real WTF is that the website software thinks that the "ss" in "classics" is the German letter ß, which it dutifully transliterates to B.

  • Joe (unregistered)

    I'd love to see a live example of this.

  • Joseph Newton (unregistered)

    Why use script at all?

    .footer {
   position: fixed;
   bottom: 0px;
   ...
}
  • Chris (unregistered) in reply to Rich
    Rich:
    Here's a slightly different take on it... http://www.themaninblue.com/experiment/footerStickAlt/

    Not adequate -- the post wants a footer that stays at the bottom of the screen. That one stays at the bottom of the page.

    If it's meant to do what the OP says, then it doesn't work.

  • (cs)

    Yeah like the posters above have noted, CSS is a better way to do this because then you still get the same effect on browsers that have JavaScript turned off. I myself like to avoid using JavaScript whenever I can do the same thing in CSS, and if I do use JavaScript I like it to be able to fall back to something that still looks nice and is functional when JavaScript is disabled, as opposed to broken and looking like a 5 year old made it.

  • (cs)

    Yawn.

    It's a client-side script, that looped once for the number of pixels in the page. It had no danger of screwing up anyone's data or crashing anyone's modern computer setup.

    It functions. It performs poorly, but it just doesn't matter, since it's not a big performance problem (like, say, doing something that's O(N^3) on a large amount of data).

    Contemplating a little piece of JavaScript like this is akin to contemplating your navel.

  • Nonymous (unregistered) in reply to Juan O.
    Juan O.:
    Welcome to CSS...

    .bottomBox { clear:both; bottom: 0%; width:100%; height:25%; padding-top:5px; overflow:hidden; }

    Or, welcome you to CSS! ;)

    0 is the same as 0% or 0px or 0em, zero is zero. Bottom has no effect on non-positioned elements. Chances are the width is already 100% since it's likely you used a block level element like a div. And what's the purpose of the overflow hidden?

    Now if you had added position: absolute; at least the bottom and width make sense...

  • Zecc (unregistered)
    Loading the site on an old computer, however, has a rather odd effect of making the footer "fall" into place instead of just appearing there.
    Maybe that was the whole point? (I know it wasn't - probably - but hey!, it could be)

    Oh, and I rather read an old post that I haven't read yet than being left dry without a reason.

  • Random (unregistered) in reply to Derrick Pallas
    Derrick Pallas:
    The Real WTF is that the website software thinks that the "ss" in "classics" is the German letter ß, which it dutifully transliterates to B.

    The real WTF is that he's presumably known about that bug forever (it has been there forever), but didn't bother fixing it (it's fixed in later articles) until ClaBics Week rolled around.

    And let's not imagine the REAL real WTF that leads one to do both conversion of 'ss' to that character and an ascii transliteration that results it into a B, on the same string for the same purpose. I'd love to see that CodeSOD. I bet he added a special case for this rather than not making it do the transliterations.

  • Gus (unregistered) in reply to Joseph Newton
    Joseph Newton:
    Why use script at all? 
    .footer {
   position: fixed;
   bottom: 0px;
   ...
}

    Because they needed to support IE 6, for which fixed positioning is b0rkn. Additionally, even in IE7 flash wigits will slide right over top of any fixed position object when you scroll (regardless of z-index).

  • (cs) in reply to TheJasper
    TheJasper:
    skztr:
    If you don't have an update to post, don't post an update. Posting old news for no reason? WTF?
    <sarcasm> yeah, that's like if a tv-network would give you a show with clips of old shows, or even just run a show they've done previously. If they don't do it, then why should the dailyWTF? </sarcasm>

    Yeah, because when you flick on the TV, you can easily trawl through archived shows stored on their servers to find one you want to see.

Leave a comment on “Classics Week: The Mentor”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article