XML Binding Change?
- RealityRipple
- Astronaut
- Posts: 662
- Joined: 2018-05-17, 02:34
- Location: Los Berros Canyon, California
- Contact:
XML Binding Change?
My extension "ExtExp" has stopped working in 28.5, apparently due to an error in the binding.xml file. The browser console says "missing ( before formal parameters" on line 20, column 9. Did something change to prevent the use of CDATA in binding methods? Do I need to wrap my code at a JS level? Did I miss something somewhere else that would trigger this error falsely? Is the location just pointing to all the cdata and it's actually a problem elsewhere? I'll be searching for the solution myself, but in case it's something known and obvious, I figured I'd ask first.
Re: XML Binding Change?
I don't think anything would have changed with the way CDATA is parsed in XML or XBL. My guess is that something in the CDATA-wrapped code is the real source of the issue, but it's difficult to say for sure. I am also not an expert on bindings.
a.k.a. Ascrod
Linux Mint 19.3 Cinnamon (64-bit), Debian Bullseye (64-bit), Windows 7 (64-bit)
"As long as there is someone who will appreciate the work involved in the creation, the effort is time well spent." ~ Tetsuzou Kamadani, Cave Story
Linux Mint 19.3 Cinnamon (64-bit), Debian Bullseye (64-bit), Windows 7 (64-bit)
"As long as there is someone who will appreciate the work involved in the creation, the effort is time well spent." ~ Tetsuzou Kamadani, Cave Story
Re: XML Binding Change?
I see nothing wrong with your code, and I suspect that something went wrong after porting bug #296814 as part of Issue #816 (UXP). It's also likely that the error in pentadactyl has the same roots.
- RealityRipple
- Astronaut
- Posts: 662
- Joined: 2018-05-17, 02:34
- Location: Los Berros Canyon, California
- Contact:
Re: XML Binding Change?
I literally got rid of everything, every scrap of JS, to the point it just has
Code: Select all
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<bindings id="extExpBindings"
xmlns="http://www.mozilla.org/xbl"
xmlns:xul="http://www.mozilla.org/keymaster/gatekeeper/there.is.only.xul"
xmlns:xbl="http://www.mozilla.org/xbl"
xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<binding id="export-button">
<implementation>
<method name="export">
<body></body>
</method>
</implementation>
</binding>
</bindings>
Code: Select all
-moz-binding: url("chrome://extexp/content/binding.xml#legacy-export-button");
Re: XML Binding Change?
What is the exact error you are getting from the Toolkit Error Console? Please but it in a code block.
- RealityRipple
- Astronaut
- Posts: 662
- Joined: 2018-05-17, 02:34
- Location: Los Berros Canyon, California
- Contact:
Re: XML Binding Change?
New Tobin Paradigm wrote: ↑2019-05-03, 18:38What is the exact error you are getting from the Toolkit Error Console? Please but it in a code block.
Code: Select all
SyntaxError: missing ( before formal parameters
binding.xml:20:9
Re: XML Binding Change?
Funny, I am pretty sure I said Toolkit Error Console not devtools browser console.
This doesn't make sense though because if it were something we did wouldn't it bust dozens of internal bindings too?
This doesn't make sense though because if it were something we did wouldn't it bust dozens of internal bindings too?
- RealityRipple
- Astronaut
- Posts: 662
- Joined: 2018-05-17, 02:34
- Location: Los Berros Canyon, California
- Contact:
Re: XML Binding Change?
To what toolkit are you referring? I don't have anything other than what's built-in: DevTools and the legacy error console, which just shows the same message.New Tobin Paradigm wrote: ↑2019-05-03, 19:51Funny, I am pretty sure I said Toolkit Error Console not devtools browser console.
This doesn't make sense though because if it were something we did wouldn't it bust dozens of internal bindings too?
I thought the same thing. That's why I was wondering if it had something to do with the url() function in CSS or something... since the JS that creates the object should fail before the binding is even called if there's a problem with it... And it's all pretty simple code.
Re: XML Binding Change?
I doubt that we have bindings that contain function definitions in CDATA.New Tobin Paradigm wrote: ↑2019-05-03, 19:51This doesn't make sense though because if it were something we did wouldn't it bust dozens of internal bindings too?
PS: I tried to revert a9682a3 mentioned above and the error goes away.
- RealityRipple
- Astronaut
- Posts: 662
- Joined: 2018-05-17, 02:34
- Location: Los Berros Canyon, California
- Contact:
Re: XML Binding Change?
I figured it out, I think. Looks like the function "export" is reserved or already exists or is just not liked. I changed it to exportXPI and suddenly everything's acting like normal.
Re: XML Binding Change?
That makes sense.. export is a keyword in js now with the backporting of stuffs i suppose.
Last edited by New Tobin Paradigm on 2019-05-03, 20:21, edited 1 time in total.
- RealityRipple
- Astronaut
- Posts: 662
- Joined: 2018-05-17, 02:34
- Location: Los Berros Canyon, California
- Contact:
Re: XML Binding Change?
Just another one of those things I really should have been less stingy with character counts over.New Tobin Paradigm wrote: ↑2019-05-03, 20:15That makes sense.. export is a keyword in js now with the backporting of stuffs.
Re: XML Binding Change?
Perhaps so. Btw thanks for your continued support of UXP Applications and being the perfect example of the indexing option with your externals on the Add-ons Sites.
BTW if any of your externals support Basilisk or Interlink let Ryan aka Lootyhoof or FranklinDM know so they can enable the listings on Phoebus for supported Application's Add-ons Site.
BTW if any of your externals support Basilisk or Interlink let Ryan aka Lootyhoof or FranklinDM know so they can enable the listings on Phoebus for supported Application's Add-ons Site.
- RealityRipple
- Astronaut
- Posts: 662
- Joined: 2018-05-17, 02:34
- Location: Los Berros Canyon, California
- Contact:
Re: XML Binding Change?
I'll have to check those... None of my users have mentioned them, although someone did post some vague statement about Waterfox, which made me think I'd better see how support is on various other offerings... Thanks for the heads-up.New Tobin Paradigm wrote: ↑2019-05-03, 20:25Perhaps so. Btw thanks for your continued support of UXP Applications and being the perfect example of the indexing option with your externals on the Add-ons Sites.
BTW if any of your externals support Basilisk or Interlink let Ryan aka Lootyhoof or FranklinDM know so they can enable the listings on Phoebus for supported Application's Add-ons Site.
Re: XML Binding Change?
Waterfox ESR68 will require one time use insanity to conform your extensions to what little Mozilla Technology is left and you can almost completely count XBL out of the equasion.
You might as well write webex versions if you are gonna bother with it and I wouldn't recommend it.
You might as well write webex versions if you are gonna bother with it and I wouldn't recommend it.
- RealityRipple
- Astronaut
- Posts: 662
- Joined: 2018-05-17, 02:34
- Location: Los Berros Canyon, California
- Contact:
Re: XML Binding Change?
O, I know WF is a lost cause. I meant like... Linux distro clones... Adblock Browser for Android... that sort of thing.New Tobin Paradigm wrote: ↑2019-05-03, 20:56Waterfox ESR68 will require one time use insanity to conform your extensions to what little Mozilla Technology is left and you can almost completely count XBL out of the equasion.
You might as well write webex versions if you are gonna bother with it and I wouldn't recommend it.