231–240 of 473 posts
Jesus Christ, to think there are people in this thread defending what the assholes in the Chrome team did is unbelievable. You make breaking changes opt-in, that is API design 101. Linus should take over Chrome development.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems Firefox supports a non-standard fourth parameter, so that won't work either. addEventListener is possibly the worst organically grown API I've seen in a long time. If anything, its sordid history should be a lesson to the Chrome dev team that fucking around with proprietary extensions (which this most definitely is) just leads to future technical debt and pain for everyone. Why do they never learn?
That isn't an issue if you use a new method name -- I believe "addEventListenerEx" was meant to be read literally. (Appending "Ex" to a function name for an expanded parameter list is a Win32 convention.)
OK, this sounds bad. But... Devil's advocacy here: are there any real-world examples of actual sites whose event behavior was actually broken by this change in Chrome 56? It happened a few months back, and I don't remember anyone complaining. I mean... it broke the author's app. Probably a few others somewhere. But it seems not to have broken anything significant. I guess I fail to see the concern here. It's an edge…
Jesus Christ, to think there are people in this thread defending what the assholes in the Chrome team did is unbelievable. You make breaking changes opt-in, that is API design 101. Linus should take over Chrome development.
"Assholes"? Did we really stoop so low on HN that insulting other developers is acceptable now?
Did anyone's website or web app break because of this change in Chrome 56? I ask because the article lists a couple things that could break such as drag 'n drop but I have not noticed anything breaking in my experience.
> they made all top-level event listeners passive by default. They call it “an intervention”. This is my very problem with Chrome/Chromium right now. The Chrome team does assumption on how things "should" be (in a highly subjective way) and breaks the web. Another example: they decided to ignore the value of `autocomplete` attributes on ` ` tags [1], because: > The tricky part here is that somewhere along the journey…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Dude, autocomplete=off should just work. Chrome does the WRONG THING. Screw you. I've probably encountered 'autocomplete=off' thousands of times in my browsing history, and maybe 1% of the time was it being used for something that wasn't user-hostile. I don't care what the spec says, I care about what's good for users. If the spec writers aren't willing to embrace that, vendors will ignore it.
A website is owned by someone. If they decide that in their shop they want to have a carpet floor it is up to users not to visit that shop (if they don't like that), but not up to adidas to turn the floor into tarmac, because that works better for their shoes...
Websites consist of code to be interpreted by browsers as they see fit, for the benefit of their users. Those users do not necessarily want exactly the experience the site authors want them to have.
> they made all top-level event listeners passive by default. They call it “an intervention”. This is my very problem with Chrome/Chromium right now. The Chrome team does assumption on how things "should" be (in a highly subjective way) and breaks the web. Another example: they decided to ignore the value of `autocomplete` attributes on ` ` tags [1], because: > The tricky part here is that somewhere along the journey…
Regulatory compliance. I've worked on applications that had to go to great lengths to get the target browser platform to not do something like auto-complete authentication credentials. Philosophically-speaking some Web Platform developers think that it's more secure for the browser to autofill credentials from a keychain so that users can use better passwords and not be burdened with remember N-pseudo-random characte…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Dude, autocomplete=off should just work. Chrome does the WRONG THING. Screw you. I've probably encountered 'autocomplete=off' thousands of times in my browsing history, and maybe 1% of the time was it being used for something that wasn't user-hostile. I don't care what the spec says, I care about what's good for users. If the spec writers aren't willing to embrace that, vendors will ignore it.
A website is owned by someone. If they decide that in their shop they want to have a carpet floor it is up to users not to visit that shop (if they don't like that), but not up to adidas to turn the floor into tarmac, because that works better for their shoes...