Discussion on Uncensor The Internet Plus | Userscripts.org

Archived Comments, replied by nathaniel_higgins @ Thu, 26 Jun 2008 11:09:41 -0500

nathaniel_higgins — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 11:09:41 -0500

Great script, however I noticed that it doesn't take into account underscores. ( _ )
sh_t!

Archived Comments, replied by CaCtUs2003 @ Tue, 03 Jun 2008 22:02:21 -0500

CaCtUs2003 — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 22:02:21 -0500

F*ck This F***ing Script! I f*cking hate this god d@mn sh*t!!!

Lol, I don't really hate it. Just testing the script, b*tch! :)

Archived Comments, replied by bobielawlintine @ Wed, 26 Dec 2007 16:54:52 -0600

bobielawlintine — Wed, 26 Dec 2007 16:54:52 -0600

Bug: "motherboards" gets incorrectly changed to "motherfuckds" which itself is spelled wrong.

Archived Comments, replied by Descriptor @ Tue, 07 Aug 2007 02:56:43 -0500

Descriptor — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 02:56:43 -0500

Maybe not as hard as you think, you just need to work on the uncensor() function, pass it the node instead of node.data.
I may come up with a way to do this myself using W3C methods that I've been reading here...
http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-DOM-Level-2-Core-...

Archived Comments, replied by FinalDoom @ Mon, 06 Aug 2007 20:04:09 -0500

FinalDoom — Mon, 06 Aug 2007 20:04:09 -0500

I don't deserve most of the credit. I just fixed all the regexp stuff and cleaned up the overall functions. The basic structure is mostly the original author's.
I changed the true false thing, but not the version, since it is so minor. At some point, I'll probably find more to add to it, but I'm busy right now.

I was going to add custom formatting for the uncensored words, like on my updated linkifier script, but the way the prior author had the script finding and replacing words makes it impossible, and I couldn't figure out how to rewrite it to do what I wanted easily.

Archived Comments, replied by Descriptor @ Mon, 06 Aug 2007 19:39:25 -0500

Descriptor — Mon, 06 Aug 2007 19:39:25 -0500

0/1 is only shorthand for true/false, though I use 0/1 sometimes like in Perl, logic circuits are literally true/false, not numbers and 1 is definitely a number not literally equal to true.
(pagerization = 1) evaluates to true because it is defined, it could be defined as anything except 0, null undefined or false. The problems happen because 0 is actually a number, but in this script it doesn't matter, except that this script is so perfect otherwise.

Good job this script is impressive, I didn't even know text nodes had a "data" property, so I learned a few things.

Archived Comments, replied by FinalDoom @ Mon, 06 Aug 2007 03:07:08 -0500

FinalDoom — Mon, 06 Aug 2007 03:07:08 -0500

Woops. Yeah, I have it as 1 on my box so I must have just forgotten to set it back last time. I figured 0 and 1 make more sense ( that's all boolean true false is essentially ) but true false is probably more correct.

Archived Comments, replied by Descriptor @ Tue, 31 Jul 2007 05:55:47 -0500

Descriptor — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 05:55:47 -0500

I noticed that
var pagerization = 1;
in the script, but you state that it is set to 0.

Also, it might be better to use true or false since you are checking for boolean and 1 is a number not exclusively true, or I should say the number 0 is not exclusively false.
Either way, whatever you prefer, I just think true/false makes more sense.

Archived Comments, replied by FinalDoom @ Mon, 30 Jul 2007 03:53:57 -0500

FinalDoom — Mon, 30 Jul 2007 03:53:57 -0500

It may be a little slower or a little faster than the original; I'm not sure. I know it does more, and I took out some unneeded parts, but couldn't rewrite the entire function structure. Javascript isn't a language I know really well.

Archived Comments, replied by Jesse Andrews @ Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:05:48 -0600

Jesse Andrews — Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:05:48 -0600

The following is an archive of comments made before threaded discussions was implemented (November 16th, 2008)