I am curious to know if anyone has been successful using processing.js inside a Firefox extension. I am aware of the difficulties of using external libraries inside extensions and the fact that it has to be loaded in a way that will not pollute the global namespace, conflict with other extensions or Firefox itself.
But with those concerns aside, I wonder if there is anything else that should be considered before attempting it (performance, etc).
I am thinking about using it on a new window, in xhtml loaded from the chrome. Any experiences, ideas and suggestions?
I had the same doubt right now, but I think it can be done, we just hace to include processing.js file in content folder of our .xpi
Related
I'm using react-rails gem to work with Reactjs in my Rails application. Everything works well until the frontend becomes to have so many components which were defined in the separated file.
The problem is every time the application was loaded, all of those files were downloaded to the browser. I know it is obvious, but kind of inefficient, because only a few react component will be used in a session.
Here is my current workspace:
--assets
----javascripts
------components
--------component_1.js.coffee
--------....
--------component_n.js.coffee
I just wonder is there any working solution to optimize this?
Reactjs does not support this, but there are other libraries you can use (requirejs for example).
A very good open source solution is LABjs.
Another one is https://webpack.github.io/.
There are others. See this discussion on reactjs site.
Edit: so apparently adding class="button" make it work... Can someone provide a reference on what other classes are there? We can't find any information on this.. Thanks
We are making an app in HTML5 using XDK, it has quite a few different views. We were planning to just link to another html page each time we want to go to a different view. But we quickly found out that hyperlinking does not work, is disabled, and button does not link either.
One of the people in my group said she saw an example about having a bunch of and then just show and hide them and use that as UI navigation... is that the only way?
Thanks in advance!
The Intel XDK doesn't insert any class definitions or require that you use a specific framework. It is a tool for assembling an HTML5 hybrid mobile app using the CSS, HTML and JS files that you supply.
If you look at the samples and the default "blank" project that is created when you create a new project you'll see that there may be references to one or more of the following "phantom" JS files:
intelxdk.js
cordova.js
xhr.js
The first two (intelxdk.js and cordova.js) are special "device API" JavaScript libraries. You won't actually find them in your project directory, they are automatically included when you use the emulator and when you build your project (which "wraps up" your HTML5 code and assets into a native wrapper that is specific to the target you are building -- it does not compile anything, it just converts it into a hybrid native/HTML5 container app that can be installed on the target platform that you built for).
The third one is a special helper JS library for dealing with CORS issues from within your app.
None of these three JS files define any classes or HTML tags, etc. They simply implement target-specific device APIs that consist of JavaScript on the "top end" and native code on the "bottom end." Your application only sees and interacts with the JavaScript interface, and only with the APIs that you need to use (which is totally optional).
For an intro to all of this, please see the Intel XDK Documentation page.
So, that means you determine which frameworks and structure your app takes. In other words, if you want to use Bootstrap and jQuery you can do so. If you decide to use the App Designer or the App Starter tools, they will define some classes that impact your layout. However, you are not required to use these tools to define your HTML and CSS, you can do it by hand or use your favorite UI framework library.
Keep in mind that your code is not being rendered by a desktop browser but the embedded "webview" that is part of the device. These webviews don't have the same memory and CPU resources that you're used to working with in a desktop browser, so you need to learn to be "lean and mean" for the best results. You are using HTML5 technologies to build a mobile app -- not creating a web site on a phone.
Hope this helps, please see our HTML5 web site for more background material. It's a little slim right now, but we're adding examples and background material as time and resources permit.
Hope that helps...
Dartium does interpret dart files and it opens plenty of fun to develop new toys, and Chrome extensions and apps. But when it comes to do scripts injection in web pages, the executeScript method only takes files supposedly one of the .css and .js formats. Files in other mimetype (typically application/dart) is offbound. Therefore, the question is pretty much naive:
Is there anyway to directly inject a Dart file?
Thanks.
Not a way to directly inject dart-files, but a workaround to inject your dart-application would be to use dart2js and than inject the compiled js-file myDartScript.dart.precompiled.js of your dart-script.
(Use the precompiled-version to avoid errors against the Content Security Policy)
Maybe you also have to inject packages/browser/dart.js and packages/browser/interop.js.
Untested
I worked with Chrome extensions which have so called background page - an html page that is loaded in background once per browser window. You can store there some javascript variables, can access extension's own localstorage, can communicate back and force with content scripts (scripts injected to pages).
Is there anything similar in Firefox and how do I use it for the tasks listed above?
If you are using the (relatively) new Add-On SDK, then the main javascript file residing in your lib directory is equivalent of a Chrome extension's background page - a persistent script that runs in the background and spawns/creates/inserts panels, widgets and content scripts.
Regarding your specific asks:
1. localStorage: Add-Ons in Firefox cannot access localStorage directly. However, you can use simple-storage for storing data similar to localStorage.
2. Communication with content-script: Add-ons can communicate with content scripts using port or postMessage.
From the point of view of a traditional Firefox extension, the browser itself is just another window containing a document, although this is a XUL document rather than an HTML document. So you can store per-window variables, although you have to be careful not to overwrite other extension variables, which usually means declaring a top-level object and adding all your variables as properties of that object.
Sharing variables between windows used to be a little harder but fortunately JavaScript modules solve that problem in simple cases (primitive types).
Extensions can communicate with content scripts although there are some wrappers in place to prevent you from accidentally doing something silly.
When creating an empty MVC 2 project, I have a lot of javascript files in my Scripts folder. Why? Will removing them affect my application?
No removing them won't affect anything, unless they are being used in pages. However you said this is an empty MVC project so you'll be fine.
They're there for you to use, to make your life easier. For example, JQuery is included.
Take for example JQuery file, It provieds functions which has solutions for crossbrowser related issues which makes developement easy. Similarly other files has functions whcih are providing readymade functionalities which can be used for rapid developement.
Unfortunatly as JS is traveling to browsers its downloaded on the client. Its suprising for not JS people as its not like .NET api where one or more dll is sufficient for all the api and developer dont have to worry(some times :)) about from where they are coming.
I will suggest you to study included JS files and include/use only those which you really wanted to use.