The navigator object has a javaEnabled function that indicates if the browser has javascript support.
This seems to be a little odd:
If JS is indeed enabled the function
will return true, well obviously.
If JS is disabled it will return
<nothing> since it is never run,
javaScript is disabled.
I must be missing something here, or is it really that useless this function?
java!= javaScript
navigator.javaEnabled checks for the presence of Java, not JavaScript.
Reference
This must be a relic from the olden days when Java applets were going to be the future of the web...
You missed the fact that it's javaEnabled not javascriptEnabled.
navigator.javaEnabled: Indicates whether the host browser is Java-enabled or not.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en/dom/window.navigator
Related
I'm trying to write a new language detector plugin for i18next for integration with hapi. There's an existing hapi-i18next plugin that is quite old (it uses an extemely old version of i18next, 1.7.10 ) and so mostly useless. And the i18next API docs are pretty vague about how to write new plugins and exactly what the language detection process is. Does it run every time the t() function runs? should it be asynchronous? Has anybody else out there recently integrated hapi with i18next? I realize this is rather general but i'm not sure where else to turn.
Never used hapi so far, but seems hapi evolved a lot since version 8 (what's actually used here)
I don't know if that project is still maintained...
Perhaps you could try to create a new hapi-i18next plugin... (was not that much code)
To create a languageDetector plugin, it should not be a big thing... start here and continue by comparing how the express language detection works
In i18next the languageDetector is triggered here
...so on init/load and on a potential language change
I hope this helps.
What I ended up doing is writing a hapi server extension rather than a plugin, and a module that runs at startup that decorates the hapi server object with the initialized i18next object. The extension is installed to run onPreHandler and it basically clones the i18next object, attaches that instance to the request object, and detects the language (from the request header or from a query parameter), then sets the cloned instance to that language. This way, whenever a route handler uses the t() function attached to the instance that's attached to the current request, we know we'll be translating into the right language. Note that this is still for Hapi 16 (I need to port to 17/18 soon)...
Recently I came across someone's code. The Alloy Markup is empty with just <Alloy />. In its controller, it adds a view using $.addTopLevelView().
How come I can't find any documentation regarding this function?
Good point. It might be because it's considered private, although it would normally start with _ to indicate that since JS doesn't actually support private methods.
It is also against the very idea of Alloy to not use the XML file for the markup but instead use "classic" Titanium code in the controller together with this method.
However, it might be a good idea to do a PR against the following file to request this to be documented:
https://github.com/appcelerator/alloy/edit/master/Alloy/lib/alloy/controllers/BaseController.js
I'm building an add-on for FireFox that simulates a website, but running from a local library. (If you want to know more, look here)
I'm looking for a way to get a hold of the user-agent string that FireFox would send if it were doing plain http. I'm doing the nsIProtocolHandler myself and serve my own implementation of nsIHttpChannel, so if I have a peek at the source, it looks like I'll have to do all the work myself.
Unless there's a contract/object-id on nsHttpHandler I could use to create an instance just for a brief moment to get the UserAgent? (Though I notice I'll need to call Init() because it does InitUserAgentComponents() and hope it'll get to there... And I guess the http protocol handler does the channels and handlers so there won't be a contract to nsHttpHandler directly.)
If I have a little peek over the wall I notice this globally available call ObtainUserAgentString which does just this in that parallel dimension...
Apparently Firefox changed how this was done in version 4. Have you tried:
alert(window.navigator.userAgent);
You can get it via XPCOM like this:
var httpHandler = Cc["#mozilla.org/network/protocol;1?name=http"].
getService(Ci.nsIHttpProtocolHandler);
var userAgent = httpHandler.userAgent;
If for some reason you actaully do need to use NPAPI like you suggest in your tags, you can use NPN_UserAgent to get it; however, I would be shocked if you actually needed to do that just for an extension. Most likely Anthony's answer is more what you're looking for.
So on one of our recent launches we had a lot of events that we were observer such as controller_action_predispatch. Once the site went live we started noticing that our observers were never getting called for those. After a little investigation one of our developers found this block of code in Mage_Core_Model_App around line 292
if ($this->_cache->processRequest()) {
$this->getResponse()->sendResponse();
} else {
$this->_initModules();
$this->loadAreaPart(Mage_Core_Model_App_Area::AREA_GLOBAL, Mage_Core_Model_App_Area::PART_EVENTS);
if ($this->_config->isLocalConfigLoaded()) {
$this->_initCurrentStore($scopeCode, $scopeType);
$this->_initRequest();
Mage_Core_Model_Resource_Setup::applyAllDataUpdates();
}
$this->getFrontController()->dispatch();
}
As you can see if $this->_cache->processRequest() that is true which it is when full page cache is enabled you never get to the dispatch. The developer did find http_response_send_before which gets call either way but it seems to me like this is a bug or you should never ever use those controller dispatch events for anything if you have full page caching enabled. Any thoughts?
Given the nature of the full page caching, I'd call this "works as intended". While it can be a little strange not to have some events firing, they had to pick a line and this one makes sense to me, especially since the controller is never really dispatched.
You should use those controller dispatch events for anything that affects the page (as it still needs to be generated), but if you are using it for tracking and such, no it would not be appropriate.
See here if you want to learn how Caching works with Magento Enterprise
http://magentophp.blogspot.com/2011/02/magento-enterprise-full-page-caching.html
The only reliable event to listen for with and without Full Page Cache enabled is http_response_send_before.
controller_front_send_response_before
This event will be fired irrespective of FPC enabled
I have written a Firefox extension that catches when a particular URL is entered and does some stuff. My main app launches Firefox with this URL. The URL contains sensitive information so I don't want it being stored in the history.
I'm concerned about the case where the extension is not installed. If its not installed and Firefox gets launched with the sensitive URL, it will get stored in history and there's nothing I can do about it. So my idea is to use a bookmarklet.
I will launch Firefox with "javascript:window.location.href='pleaseinstallthisplugin.html'; sensitiveinfo='blahblah'".
If the extension is not installed they will get redirected to a page that tells them to install it and the sensitive info won't get stored in the history. If the extension IS installed it will grab the information in the sensitiveinfo variable and do its thing.
My question is, can the bookmarklet call a method in the extension to pass the sensitive info (and if so, how) or can the extension catch when javascript is being called in the bookmarklet?
How can a bookmarklet and Firefox extension communicate?
p.s. The alternative means of getting around this situation would be for my main app to launch Firefox and communicate with the extension using sockets but I am loath to do that because I've run into too many issues over the years with users with crazy firewalls blocking socket communication. I'd like to do everything without sockets if possible.
As far as I know, bookmarklets can never access chrome files (extensions).
Bookmarklets are executed in the scope of the current document, which is almost always a content document. However, if you are passing it in via the command line, it seems to work:
/Applications/Namoroka.app/Contents/MacOS/firefox-bin javascript:alert\(Components\)
Accessing Components would throw if it was not allowed, but the alert displays the proper object.
You could use unsafeWindow to inject a global. You can add a mere property so that your bookmarklet only needs to detect whether the global is defined or not, but you should know that, as far as I know, there is no way to prohibit sites in a non-bookmarklet context from also sniffing for this same global (since it may be a privacy concern to some that sites can detect whether they are using the extension). I have confirmed in my own add-on which injects a global in a manner similar to that below that it does work in a bookmarklet as well as regular site context.
If you register an nsIObserver, e.g., where content-document-global-created is the topic, and then unwrap the subject, you can inject your global (see this if you need to inject something more sophisticated like an object with methods).
Here is some (untested) code which should do the trick:
var observerService = Cc['#mozilla.org/observer-service;1'].getService(Ci.nsIObserverService);
observerService.addObserver({observe: function (subject, topic, data) {
var unsafeWindow = XPCNativeWrapper.unwrap(subject);
unsafeWindow.myGlobal = true;
}}, 'content-document-global-created', false);
See this and this if you want an apparently easier way in an SDK add-on (not sure whether SDK postMessage communication would work as an alternative but with the apparently same concern that this would be exposed to non-bookmarklet contexts (i.e., regular websites) as well).