• Da' Man (unregistered)

    Sick! Sick! Sick!

  • Calli Arcale (unregistered)

    noscript is not just useful for paranoids who seriously think the browser is going to take over their computer and empty their bank accounts (as opposed to redirecting their clicks to fraudulently pump up a third party's ad revenue). I know a lot of people who use it just because they're sick of looking at stupid rollover ads.

  • Worf (unregistered) in reply to Calli Arcale
    Calli Arcale:
    noscript is not just useful for paranoids who seriously think the browser is going to take over their computer and empty their bank accounts (as opposed to redirecting their clicks to fraudulently pump up a third party's ad revenue). I know a lot of people who use it just because they're sick of looking at stupid rollover ads.

    Noscript is also good at preventing drive-by downloads/malware installation/etc. All it takes is one wrong click to get the crap onto your machine. Even legitimate adservers sometimes serve malware javascript.

    Noscript also highlights the general illiteracy that web developers have - there are websites you browse that are literally completely functional without javascript (I didn't realize Apple's website was not "allowed" - it just kept working), and websites where clicking a link requires javascript to move one page.

  • Keybounce (unregistered) in reply to Ilyak
    Ilyak:
    ... Each template can output any number of XML subtrees and also call other templates, making the language turing compatible. There are variables, for-loops, condition statements. Any questions?
    Yes.

    Why do we allow something that is supposed to be for formatting (stylesheets, xslt) have both the full power of a turing machine and full access to browser state and data, and the ability to upload that information back to whereever?

  • Real-modo (unregistered)

    ... an example of Greenspun's Tenth Rule. (Assuming XSL was coded in C or derivatives, of course.)

  • Real-modo (unregistered)

    PS: The result is slightly elongated horizontally on Firefox 3.5 Beta 4 / linux, also.

  • (cs)

    OH NO!

    I took care to disable images in my browser to avoid being lethally brain-crashed by Langford's Parrot-basilisk, and now you tell me you can draw it on my screen just using XML? I'm so screwed.

  • AdT (unregistered) in reply to Andy Gottit
    Andy Gottit:
    XML or not, with scripting turned off, that's how it looks. What, you think I made that up?

    The Real WTF #1 is that you consider XSLT "scripting". The Real WTF #2 is that my Firefox with NoScript enabled (including on TDWTF) renders the XML just fine. The Real WTF #3 is that because of something you did in 1998, you think you had a clue.

  • PC Paul (unregistered) in reply to WayneCollins
    WayneCollins:
    There is plenty of use for an "identity" transform. As in "I have to supply a transform, but I don't want to actually change my XML. So I need an identity transform."

    It would be convenient if the "identity transform" were trivial to write.

    Maybe not trivial to write, but trivial to have in your toolbox:

     <xsl:template match="node()|@*">
   <xsl:copy>
     <xsl:apply-templates select="@*"/>
     <xsl:apply-templates/>
   </xsl:copy>
 </xsl:template>

    (Thanks to dpawsons XSLT FAQ which every XSLTer should have a bookmark to.

  • Crikey (unregistered) in reply to JdFalcon04

    That's by Bisqwit, he has a YouTube channel and he's really good

Leave a comment on “Stupid Coding Tricks: XSLT Mandelbrot”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #259058:

Log Out

« Return to Article