<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Recursive &#187; javascript</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.jezmckean.com/tag/javascript/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.jezmckean.com</link>
	<description>adjective: see &#039;Recursive&#039;</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Jan 2010 12:04:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>BBC Homepage Beta Using jQuery</title>
		<link>http://blog.jezmckean.com/bbc-homepage-beta-using-jquery/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.jezmckean.com/bbc-homepage-beta-using-jquery/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2007 22:57:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jez</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Code]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Musings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Personal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Web]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bbc]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[javascript]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jquery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[js]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.jezmckean.com/bbc-homepage-beta-using-jquery/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The BBC Beta Homepage is using jQuery, but unfortunately it&#8217;s ugly. I should qualify that &#8211; I think it&#8217;s a good move to make the homepage more personalisable, but does it have to look so Web2.0? Big text was a fad a year ago, but it&#8217;s too informal for an internationally recognised and respected news [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.jezmckean.com/bbc-homepage-beta-using-jquery/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>JavaScript Bug &#8211; Modulo of small numbers</title>
		<link>http://blog.jezmckean.com/javascript-bug-modulo-of-small-numbers/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.jezmckean.com/javascript-bug-modulo-of-small-numbers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2007 09:41:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jez</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Code]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tips]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Web]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bug]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hack]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[javascript]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[js]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.jezmckean.com/javascript-bug-modulo-of-small-numbers/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It seems that there is a problem with the modulo function, &#8216;%&#8217;, in JavaScript. For example: 10 % 0.1 should equate to zero but comes out as 0.09999999999999945 probably due to some internal floating-point rounding errors. Easy solution (a hack really): Multiply both numbers by 1000 before using the modulo function.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.jezmckean.com/javascript-bug-modulo-of-small-numbers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
