Anyone have any more ideas on the original post? I'm running 2.0.160.0 build 9078 currently. The --enable-user-script is working as I can get simple user.js with alert to popup a window but no further processing in the userscript is done. Anyone? Are user.js scripts working for you? I'm running Windows XP sp2 (or maybe sp3) if that matters. This is REALLY captured my curiosity as to why others can run user.js and I cannot. At least not fully. Thankfully, nearly everything I want Chrome, Igoogle or GM to do is available via updates, gadgets, bookmarklets (VERY cool that LastPass now works via bookmarklets) etc. Now I just want my user.js files to work. Any ideas? Anyone? Help!
On Jan 27, 4:03 pm, cjbehm <[email protected]> wrote: > Oh I expect things to break, especially User Scripts. I just couldn't > find any mention of it in change logs, open/closed issues, etc. I'm > not saying that it isn't there somewhere, but I couldn't find it. > > On Jan 27, 3:47 pm, Aaron Boodman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > It's the dev channel -- things will change/break without warning. I'll > > try and get things like this into the dev release notes, but no > > guarantees. > > > Once we get to the stable channel, we will of course do real release > > notes and try not to break compatibility. > > > - a > > > On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 12:19 PM, cjbehm <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Ahhhh - ok, thanks. > > > > Gotta say, I wish that was in the release notes, since it broke all my > > > scripts :) > > > > On Jan 27, 3:13 pm, Aaron Boodman <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 11:45 AM, cjbehm <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > It used to be that I could have a common.user.js and then call > > >> > functions that were defined within "common" from other scripts (or > > >> > from the JS console). Now, it seems like Chrome/Chromium reads the > > >> > script, executes it, and flushes it. > > > >> > Bluntly, that sucks. Hopefully that's a bug and will be fixed, > > >> > otherwise I'll just stick with the build before that changed :) When > > >> > I'm not at work I plan to file a bug report on that, because I think > > >> > it's broken behavior. > > > >> It was done on purpose, for compatibility with Greasemonkey, which > > >> also does this. All that's happening is that your script is being > > >> wrapped in an anonymous function: "(funtion() {" + your code + "})()". > > > >> If you want to share code between scripts, you can do something like: > > > >> window.foo = function() { > > >> ... > > > >> } > > > >> ... and then call foo() from other scripts. > > > >> - a --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Chromium Discussion mailing list: [email protected] View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-discuss -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
