61–70 of 161 posts
Doesn't seem to work on OSX. Connecting to debug port from a different chrome brings up an empty page. Running Version 59.0.3069.0 (Official Build) canary (64-bit)
same for me. Wonder if we're doing something wrong?
This is fantastic. I'm using a combination of Chrome and PhantomJS for karma testing right now, for https://github.com/paypal/paypal-checkout and https://github.com/krakenjs/xcomponent . There are hundreds of tests opening up hundreds of iframes and popup windows, and sending a lot of cross-window messages, and that ends up being really memory hungry. Chrome deals pretty well with garbage collection, so long as I'm c…
The DevTools Protocol is the primary API for headless Chrome, but we are excited for higher-level abstractions like PhantomJS & NightmareJS's API to manipulate the browser as well. Plenty of details to work out, but hopefully sometime this year you'll get a drop-in solution for some of your testing to upgrade from Phantom's older QTWebKit to the latest Chromium.
https://bitbucket.org/lindenlab/dullahan I've been working on a fully open source Windows/macOS library (via Chromium Embedded Framework) that allows you to render pages to memory (and then of course to bitmaps, textures etc.) as well as inject synthesized mouse/keyboard/JavaScript events. It currently uses (what amounts to) Chrome 57. Looks like this might make my project obsolete.
What does this mean for Electron and other apps that depend on Electron?
I am looking forward to cli tools powered by electron. Imagine the beauty of a grep writting in js, executed by a chrome binary. :D
https://bitbucket.org/lindenlab/dullahan I've been working on a fully open source Windows/macOS library (via Chromium Embedded Framework) that allows you to render pages to memory (and then of course to bitmaps, textures etc.) as well as inject synthesized mouse/keyboard/JavaScript events. It currently uses (what amounts to) Chrome 57. Looks like this might make my project obsolete.
Thank you anyway for your efforts; I hope you interpret this as a validation of your having correctly identified a sorely-needed tool.
This is fantastic. I'm using a combination of Chrome and PhantomJS for karma testing right now, for https://github.com/paypal/paypal-checkout and https://github.com/krakenjs/xcomponent . There are hundreds of tests opening up hundreds of iframes and popup windows, and sending a lot of cross-window messages, and that ends up being really memory hungry. Chrome deals pretty well with garbage collection, so long as I'm c…
We (Chrome) have reached out to PhantomJS to inquire if they're interested in collaborating: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/phantomjs-dev/S-mEBwuSgKQ/tU... The DevTools Protocol is the primary API for headless Chrome, but we are excited for higher-level abstractions like PhantomJS & NightmareJS's API to manipulate the browser as well. Plenty of details to work out, but hopefully sometime this year you'll get a drop-…
Memory usage is pretty high, lot of heavy webpages result in crashes/hangs, there are many inconsistencies between features available in full version and headless, their debugging protocol has different APIs that work on headless/non-headless in Linux or Windows, and so on.
Of the bugs I've submitted, some have been fixed in the upcoming M59, so other critical ones may take longer due to their backlog. I suppose for now (maybe until M61-62), Chrome full with xvfb or even PhantomJS are better options. When you realize that Chrome is about the same size (by LoC) as the Linux kernel [1], you can't help but wish for a leaner & faster headless browser.
There seems to be some work going on building Firefox pure headless as well. Great overall, as long as all the browsers try to follow the RemoteDebug initiative [2].
[1] https://josephg.com/blog/electron-is-flash-for-the-desktop/
I've been testing Chrome headless extensively for the past few months, and while it's a good step, but it's not stable for high-volume or even diverse set of webpages. Memory usage is pretty high, lot of heavy webpages result in crashes/hangs, there are many inconsistencies between features available in full version and headless, their debugging protocol has different APIs that work on headless/non-headless in Linux…
I've been testing Chrome headless extensively for the past few months, and while it's a good step, but it's not stable for high-volume or even diverse set of webpages. Memory usage is pretty high, lot of heavy webpages result in crashes/hangs, there are many inconsistencies between features available in full version and headless, their debugging protocol has different APIs that work on headless/non-headless in Linux…
Unfortunately, I have to agree, though they have been very helpful and vigilant on the bugs that have been filed. Most of mine have been fixed in a few days.