I am trying to build a simple AngularJS application using an old Chrome (version 2010).
Then I am facing various problems with routing. Basically Chrome becomes unstable, even crashes often.
I suspect that my old Chrome is not compatible with the specific AngularJS I am using (v1.3.8).
Where can I find such information? I mean the version of Chrome needed by AugularJS of specific version?
I searched AngularJS document, but didn't get a clue.
Edited:
Quoted from link https://code.angularjs.org/1.3.8/docs/misc/faq:
We run our extensive test suite against the following browsers: Safari, Chrome, Firefox, Opera 15, IE9 and mobile browsers (Android, Chrome Mobile, iOS Safari). See Internet Explorer Compatibility for more details in supporting legacy IE browsers.
I think these details above are a little vague as a reference. I understand the recommended practice is upgrading Chrome to the latest. As "Derek 朕會功夫" commented, my environment is restricted to some extent. One of the restrictions is, it is not feasible to upgrade Chrome.
That is why I want to find out the exact Chrome version supported by AngularJS. People may come up with similar concerns with other browsers like Firefox. Right?
thanks!
Answer To PSL: I am not using bangrang.
BTW, "add a comment" link doesn't work for me , so I have to comment here :(
As far as I can tell, you require Chrome 13 (MDN) from 2011 in order to support the functions tested in the Angular source found here, such as File and Blob.
Related
I initially assumed it would be the IE that is currently installed but there seems to be some differences. I get JS related errors when loading my add-in Outlook 2016 Desktop but not in Office 365 (Web). How would I find solution to the problem if I do not know which IE is being used to render my add-in?
I found also some differences on the IE installed on your computer and the one running you add-in. For example, see the answer from Jeffrey Chen here he explains that the two IE do not run in the same integrity level (L-level vs M-Level).
I believe you may be interested in using F12 for debugging your add-in iFrame, see instructions here.
On Windows, the version of Internet Explorer used to render the add-in is the version of your Internet Explorer. The only slight exception to this rule is that note that we're talking about IE here, not Edge. So if you're on Win10, the renderer for the Add-in (at least as of today, end-of-2016) is IE, not Edge.
There might be some other issue that's being masked. Try attaching a debugger when the Add-in runs? (For instructions on the latter, see https://stackoverflow.com/a/37168644/678505).
I made an addon for Firefox and it works with the latest version. My problem is that I want it to work with all versions of Firefox. How can I do this?
Info:
I used the Add-on SDK to make the extension.
I use jQuery too in my extension, could it come form here?
Add-on SDK 1.14 (the current release) marks add-ons compatible with Firefox 19 and disallows installation in older Firefox versions. If you don't like that you have several options:
Edit app-extension/install.rdf in your Add-on SDK install and set minVersion to something other than Firefox 19. If your extension is simple you might even get away with that and your extension will actually work in older Firefox versions, maybe even in Firefox 4 (definitely not below that however, restartless extensions were introduced in Firefox 4). This is obviously not supported and verifying that everything really works correctly (e.g. no memory leaks) will be close to impossible.
You can get an old version of the Add-on SDK. You will not get any of the improvements in the newer Add-on SDK versions but you get support for old Firefox versions. You will still need an Add-on SDK version that's compatible to at least Firefox 10 however, otherwise your add-ons won't install in current Firefox versions (Firefox 10 is where the "compatible by default" switch was flipped). Also, regardless of compatibility flags - while your extension might work correctly in current Firefox versions, it's just as likely that it won't.
You can drop the Add-on SDK and just create a classic extension. Then you can set the compatibility boundaries to anything you like. Taking care of backwards compatibility will also be your responsibility however - and depending on what range of Firefox versions you want to support this is a very non-trivial task.
The main question is however: why do you want that? The current Extended Support Release is Firefox 18, so no version below Firefox 18 is supported by Mozilla. There are of course a few users on outdated Firefox versions for some reason but people who don't update also rarely go install new extensions. So, do you really want to spend tons of time making your extension work in Firefox 1.0 (release 2004)? How about Firefox 4 (released 2011)? How much effort do you want to invest into staying compatible with old versions when there are tons of addon-relevant changes in each single release?
You should read the addon compatibility page on the sdk documentation.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/developers/docs/sdk/1.14/dev-guide/guides/firefox-compatibility.html
Did you simply try to change the minVersion field in your install.rdf file?
So I've been looking at Spine.js recently as an alternative to Backbone. However, in the documentation is states:
Works in all major browsers (Chrome, Safari, Firefox, IE >= 7)
then in the comments on this page some one says:
Spine doesn't seem to run in IE6 or IE7... Maybe even other Internet
Explorers. Shouldn't this be pointed out? Backbone runs fine with
these. Am I just missing something?
reply:
Maybe because of json? "If you're using an older browser which doesn't
have native JSON support (i.e. IE 7), you'll need to include json2.js
which adds legacy support." (from the docs)
This is literally ALL the information i could find on the subject. Does anyone know if ie6 is at all supported? If not I'm afraid I will not be able to use it...
I can confirm that spine.js works on IE7 - we don't have IE6 as a requirement nor any IE6 tests machines, so I can't comment on IE6 support.
I would suggest running a quick test, using it takes under an hour to get a simple app running that you can verify things on.
Yikes! I've been a developer for many years and have always tried to emphasize code that is compatible with as many systems as possible.
Recent, I purchased the book jQuery in Action and started reading it. I am very disturbed by the fact that the included source code doesn't appear to work correctly on either of the browsers on my current computer.
Specifically, I downloaded the book's source code and selected the "jQuery Selectors Lab" for Chapter 2. But it doesn't look how it does in the book.
On Google Chrome, both the DOM Sample and DOM Sample Code panes are completely empty. On IE7, things appear much closer to how they appear in the book. But the source code in the DOM Sample Code pane is all on one line (which extends to the right, off the page). Note that the screenshots in the book are of a browser running on the Mac.
I'm curious what sort of cross-browser compatibility users more experienced with jQuery are finding, and what this revelation means for developers who like to be as compatible as possible and are planning to use jQuery.
jQuery is actively supported in all these browsers:
Firefox 2.0+
Internet Explorer 6+
Safari 3+
Opera 10.6+
Chrome 8+
There are known problems with outdated browsers as per the list below:
Mozilla Firefox 1.0.x
Internet Explorer 1.0-5.x
Safari 1.0-2.0.1
Opera 1.0-9.x
Konqueror
jQuery generally works with Konqueror and Firefox 1.0.x, but there may be some unexpected bugs since we do not test them as regularly.
If you are using any of the outdated browsers, then this could be your problem, otherwise, you should post your code here on stackoverflow to get help. It may not be the browser causing the problem, but it could be the way code is written or executed.
I think part of your problem is that you're accessing something from the file system that is meant to be loaded from a web server. For example, I see this error in Chome on your chapter 2 example:
XMLHttpRequest cannot load file://...chapter2/dom.sample.html.
Origin null is not allowed by Access-Control-Allow-Origin.
Things seem to be behaving reasonably well in Chrome other than that sort of thing.
I usually target IE[789], Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Opera and I haven't seen many browser issues that are specific to jQuery or jQuery-UI. The problems are mostly CSS issues and certain JavaScript problems (in IE for both) that aren't jQuery problems.
Version 3 of jQuery is maintained for the following desktop browsers :
Chrome: (Current - 1) and Current
Edge: (Current - 1) and Current
Firefox: (Current - 1) and Current
Internet Explorer: 9+
Safari: (Current - 1) and Current
Opera: Current
It is also maintained for the following mobile browsers :
Stock browser on Android 4.0+
Safari on iOS 7+
Source : https://jquery.com/browser-support/
I wouldn't be overly worried about the cross-browser compatibility of jQuery so much as I would the quality of the code in the case of this book. I haven't personally looked at this book so I can't make a personal judgement; however, I am the lead developer for a web application that currently has around 15,000 users and we have been confidently using jQuery for a couple of years now with no issues. We have to support customers on a number of platforms using all of the major browsers that are on the market. When jQuery code is written properly and tested for all environments, it can absolutely work properly regardless of what browser you are using.
Code samples appear to use outdated jQuery v1.4. Download latest version and check known issues for more details about cross-browser compatibility.
I don't know why but if I copy whole example directory to the tomcat/webapps, it works fine. But if I open page (lab.selectors.html) directly from the browser, it doesn't display dom sample section. The error message from the firefox console was like this:
[16:56:36.335] junk after document element # file:///C:/JavaScript/jqia2/chapter2/dom.sample.html:2
I am currently working on the File API. After initial investigation found that the Chrome, Firefox (new versions ) have good support for this. However IE, Opera have not implemented it and Safari have partial support for this.
Can some one please let me know
Do opera and IE support the File API ? Is it in plan for future release?
Safari says to have partially implemented the File API. How much this partial this is implemented ? Have they implemented XHRHttpRequest.send(File) method ? So that we can send the file object to server.
My understanding is that the Chrome and Firefox are only two browsers today to have support for the drag drop file to web browsers feature. I that right ?
Yes, File API successfully implemented in WebKit browsers as of today.In Gecko it is partially implemented and for other browser it is not implemented yet. You can check detail in "Comparison of layout engines (HTML5)".
Here is all the gory details in an "easy" to digest way. Well nothing about HTML5 support is really easy, but this is the best source for version information:
http://caniuse.com/fileapi
For status on File API and any other HTML5 API's keep a tab on HTML5 Readiness