> And as much it pains me ... is it about time we had a
> browser_version_compatibility_plugin.js ?
> [snip]
> Hmm. There are a LOT of
> browsers and versions aren't there?
There are indeed. I think most of us would agree, though, that IE is
a special case. And answering my own snooty question earlier, yes,
they *can* get things right: IE provides us with conditional markup.
So for this special case of IE, I for one wouldn't have any problem
with:
<script type='text/javascript' src='prototype.js'></script>
<!--[if IE]>
<script type='text/javascript' src='prototypeIE.js'></script>
<![endif]-->
...where prototypeIE.js redefines things that need to be handled for
IE.
But it's only appropriate if supporting IE is causing really
significant bloat (for instance, if we really did have to have a
massive list of all known intrinsic functions), since the flip side of
this being nice for non-IE users in terms of download time is that for
IE users (the majority of 'net users), it results in an extra HTTP
request -- and given that there are usually only two active at a time,
that's a hit to page load time. My impression is that Prototype isn't
massively bloated by IE support at the moment, so there's no call for
this (yet). Committers, please correct me if I'm wrong there.
--
T.J. Crowder
tj / crowder software / com
On Jun 6, 2:38 pm, "Richard Quadling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> 2008/6/6 T.J. Crowder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Yeah, Richard's approach would be about eight times more elegant...if
> > there were something reliable to test for. It can be IE-specific, of
> > course. I was sure when I saw his post that there would be
> > *something* we could check for, but none of the things that come to
> > mind are both present (IE doesn't have arity) and sufficiently unique
> > (see Kangax's comments about call, apply, etc.). (BTW, don't try to
> > iterate the properties of an intrinsic function object using for..in
> > with IE6 on XP; Bad Things happen.)
>
> > Sadly my big list approach just won't work, it will always have holes
> > in it. For example:
>
> > var x = document.createElement("p");
> > if (Object.isFunction(x.getAttribute)) { ... }
>
> > So between the holes and the bloat involved in handling even the ones
> > we could handle, I'd say we just mention it in Object.isFunction's
> > docs and move on, until/unless someone finds the magic thing.
> > --
> > T.J. Crowder
> > tj / crowder software / com
>
> > On Jun 6, 12:51 pm, kangax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> I wish it was that easy : ) Unfortunately, we can't really account for
> >> all host objects, which are notorious for their incompliance with
> >> specs (e.g. it's well known how some of them have no constructor
> >> property, and others throw error when accessing certain properties).
> >> Hardcoding few methods barely solves the problem.
> >> We could of course check for "apply/call" members on an object, but
> >> guess what - those are undefined as well : )
> >> As far as I remember jQuery calls object's toString, then tests if
> >> result contains "function". That's clever, but unreliable, as any
> >> other object which defines "toString" to return something that
> >> contains "function" will produce falsy results.
>
> >> - kangax
>
> >> On Jun 6, 6:08 am, "T.J. Crowder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> > OMG, I can confirm this, on IE6 anyway. (Couldn't they get *anything*
> >> > right? I mean, I know Firefox has its issues, but... And yes,
> >> > technically a function is an object, but that's no excuse.)
>
> >> > The only workaround that immediately comes to mind is to actually have
> >> > a list of these and compare against them in IE -- e.g.:
>
> >> > isFunction: (function(){
> >> > if (typeof window.close == "object") {
> >> > // IE version, works around typeof returning "object" for
> >> > intrinsic functions
> >> > return function(object) {
> >> > return (
> >> > typeof object == "function"
> >> > || object === window.close
> >> > || object === document.getElementById
> >> > // etc., etc., etc.
> >> > );
> >> > };
> >> > } else {
> >> > // Non-IE version, expects typeof to work correctly
> >> > return function(object) {
> >> > return typeof object == "function";
> >> > };
> >> > }
>
> >> > })()
>
> >> > Blech. The more of this that happens, the more I want a separate file
> >> > that only IE people have to download containing these workarounds...
> >> > --
> >> > T.J. Crowder
> >> > tj / crowder software / com
>
> >> > On Jun 6, 9:27 am, Viktor Kojouharov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> > > Here's quite the problem in IE.
>
> >> > > For certain 'native' functions, like window.close, or
> >> > > document.getElementById, typeof for those functions returns on object
> >> > > in IE. Consequently, Object.isFunction will actually return false for
> >> > > those functions.
>
> >> > > Though there's probably little that can be done, I thought you guys
> >> > > should know about it.
>
> What about a process of reduction? Those that can be id'd successfully
> by having a particular property then that solves them. The remaining
> ones ...
>
> And as much it pains me ... is it about time we had a
> browser_version_compatibility_plugin.js ?
>
> That way, for those that need to support clients with ie6, then they
> load the ie6 compatible layer. sort of thing. Hmm. There are a LOT of
> browsers and versions aren't there?
>
> --
> -----
> Richard Quadling
> Zend Certified Engineer :http://zend.com/zce.php?c=ZEND002498&r=213474731
> "Standing on the shoulders of some very clever giants!"
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-core?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
