Andrea Giammarchi  🍥

I mean ... yeah, we can all blame JS for breaking there, but if a site has so much wrong JS on the Front End, do we really expect it to have super skilled Back End developers? I don't think so ... but I am sure they complain when any user is "lost in transaction"

TIL: in Italy there are companies that make sites that don't work on Firefox, and likely won't work in Chrome neither. Form emails normalization where they capitalize Each@Email.Com, awkward cell phones input ruined by awkward JS ... the issue is not JS per se, it's incompetence!

I think this summarizes well why Open Office is not always what I prefer https://goomics.net/296/ 

These things are like the equivalent of “please rate us/take a survey/did you like it?” *before* having a chance to even read a thing. Who/why does this happen? It’s all fan out and nothing else, imho

is there a metric like “instant tab close on pop under” on the Web? You know, those kind of pop ups that cover whatever you’re reading so you just stop reading and likely become functional illiterate ‘cause all you read and remember is the title … Web 2021

This is now available via https://cdn.skypack.dev/linkedom/worker  Thanks to @matthewcp for contribution, it works on deno, Web Workers, or anywhere without DOM around https://twitter.com/matthewcp/status/1411321458089996291 …

variant: const c = new WeakMap; function With(f) { let c=w.get(f); if (!c) w.set(f,c=Function('with(arguments[0])return(' + f + ').apply(this,[].slice.call(arguments,1))')); return c; } const log = With((num) => { console.log(data, num); }); log({data: 123}, 456);

to play around with: function With() { return Function( 'with(arguments[0])return(' + arguments[arguments.length - 1] + ').apply(this,[].slice.call(arguments, 1, -1))' ).apply(this, arguments); } With({data: 123}, 456, (num) => { console.log(data, num); });

That boils down to the fact that any library based on eval, Function, hence the with statement, is practically future hostile. TC39 has no intention to resurrect the with statement, so even if I have libraries based on it, ‘cause it’s an awesome feature, be careful what you pick.

The list continue with Mavo, tag-params, and so on. It requires Function to escape from the "use strict" directive, so it’s inevitably CSP troublesome, even if the body contains only the with statement. Web extensions v3 won’t be able to use it, and there’s still no replacement.