Safari has a "feature" which preloads pages while you are typing in the url.
Now for most users this is indeed a feature, speeding up page loads. But for web developers it can cause trouble - especially when it automatically loads scripts (such as importers or background scripts) that you have used earlier but have no intention of running currently.
This happens under Safari 8.x but it is possible that this was also the case on older versions.
Also, note that this feature is distinct from "DNS prefetch" which is the only related explanation I have come across - I have disabled DNS prefetch and that did not solve this issue...
The answer is much simpler than I thought. :)
Related
In AmiBroker there is optimize option. It allows you to fine tune values for indicators or even any other parameters. Is there anything like that in pine script? couldn't find it easily using google.
No. Can't be done automatically yet on TV. Adding the feature is being considered though.
there are private chrome extensions. just a couple months ago there were some public versions but TV has started banning people and finding ways to shut down the extensions ability to properly see and feel the page
For our project we need .NET WebBrowser control that supports automatic Windows authentication (like IE does). We have reviewed a number of options, but still can't select proper one:
1) Standard WebBrowser control based on IE. Quite fast, but it just has enormous memory leaks. On our rich-script page each opening of new page leaks about 7Mb of memory. There are a lot of discussions around it, but no solution.
2) Awesomium WebBrowser control (awesomium.com). It looked as really good option and in documentation was stated that it supported automatic windows authentication, so we were going to buy it. But automatic windows authentication just doesn't work. Support simply ignores all questions about it (although answers other ones quite quickly). That was one of the worst support of paid components that I have seen.
3) GeckoFx - it works quite well, but it is too slow (even IE control in 2-3 times faster).
4) Webkit.Net - it is very fast and it would have been good choice, but it doesn't support automatic windows authentication at all.
Are there any other choices that we can consider? Both free/paid components work for us.
have you tried a version of geckofx that uses a newer firefox? eg. https://bitbucket.org/geckofx/geckofx-9.0/downloads
I have been researching this a wee bit and it seems to boil down to:
'Eyeball Mark 1'
The best tip seems to be the use of SuperPreview from Microsoft's Expression team.
If anyone has automated a way to go about this I would love to hear about it.
Also, I believe that SuperPreview requires a work around for a password protected app to work properly. There is a work around at MSDN Blog, but if anyone has come up with another way, could you share it with me please?
Thanks in advance!
Some products, like Telerik WebUI Test Studio, lets you build your test and play a movie with the results in different browsers (not sure about IE6 and IE8 support)
Others lets you compare bitmaps of screenshots of tests in one browser and the other. The problem is that the minimum 1-bit shift will result in an test error.
As background, I currently develop for a university, and we have problems with departments demanding "web 2.0 content" and accessibility requirements.
How do really big sites that are JavaScript based deal with 508 Compliance? Some sites degrade, and others require enabling JavaScript. How much impact does one decision have versus the other?
Also, in a realistic sense, how much development time should be devoted the accessible versions of sites versus the "main" versions?
I'm a blind developer and find it possible to use many Web 2.0 sites - this is most certainly possible.
Firstly, I strongly advise against making a separae accessible site, regardless of how many people advise you to do this. This is bad practice and will end up being more work, even if it initialy seems simpler.
Next, try to use progressive enhancement (particularly if this is a new site). Code the site without any Javascript; it's not just accessibility which benefits. Then, in your OnLoad() go through and attach Click events to the anchor tags; this way if you have Javascript you'll see the Ajax version, otherwise you will have a full page refresh and see another HTML page.
Luckily, there is a new standard, WAI-Aria (www.w3.org/WAI/intro/aria.php) which makes this much simpler. You attach attributes to HTML tags to identify the semantics of an Ajax control, for example. The only problem with Aria is that it only works with newer screen readers and web browsers. The university may well require the site be accessible to people running older software.
I'm a screen reader user and often use Javascript enabled sites. Javascript is not an accessibility issue, the way it is used can be. For example if the site uses javascript that requires the use of a mouse and doesn't have keyboard alternatives it will not be 508 compliant. An example of a site that uses Javascript and is accessible is stackoverflow.com. The only feature that isn't accessible is the ability to determine if you have accepted an answer to a question. I would take a look at the links in Annie's answer. All the blind college students I know use a fairly modern browser with Javascript enabled, Lynx is no longer popular in the blind community. If you want to try using a screen reader a good open source one for windows can be found at
http://www.nvda-project.org/
and it works well with firefox. If you want to try using the web with out Javascript install the Noscript addin.
Sites don't have to disable JavaScript to be accessible. Many sites use ARIA roles to work better with screen readers. There's a giant list of articles on accessible AJAX applications here. You could try something like AxsJAX.
In the bad old days of interactive console applications, Don Libes created a tool called Expect, which enabled you to write Tcl scripts that interacted with these applications, much as a user would. Expect had two tremendous benefits:
It was possible to script interactions that otherwise would have had to be repeated by hand, tediously. A classic example was dialup Internet access hell (from the days before PPP).
It was possible to write scripts to test one's own interactive applications, programmatically, as part of a regression suite.
Today most interactive applications are on the web, not on the console. Hence my question: is there any tool that provides the ability to interact with web pages and web forms programmatically, much as Expect provides the ability to interact with console applications programmatically?
(The closest thing I am aware of is Chickenfoot.)
You might be looking for Selenium
I've used Selenium RC in conjunction with Python to drive web page interactions programmatically. This has allowed me to write pretty extensive user tests in which forms and inputs are driven and their results are measured.
Check out the Selenium IDE on Firefox (as mentioned above). It allows you to record tests in the browser and play them back, either using the IDE itself, or the Remote Control app.
Perl Mechanize works pretty well for this exact issue.
HTTPS and some authentication issues are tricky at times. I will be posting couple questions about those in the future.
I did a ton of Expect work in a former life and always thought Don Libes' Expect book was one of the best-written and most enlightening technical books I'd ever seen.
Hands down I would say that Perl's WWW::Mechanize library is what you want. I note above that you were having trouble finding documentation. There is good documentation for it! Look up the module's distribution on search.cpan.org and see what all is packaged with it. There's a FAQ, Cookbook with examples, etc. Plus I've always been able to get help on the web. If you can't get it here, try at use.perl.org or perlmonks.org. WWW::Mechanize's author, Andy Lester, is present on Stack Overflow. (He's also an all around friendly and helpful guy.)
I believe WWW::Mechanize also has a program that is analogous to Expect's autoexpect program: you set up a proxy process running this program as a server, point your browser to it as a proxy, perform the actions you want to automate, and then the proxy program gives you a WWW::Mechanize program for you to use as a base for your project. (If it works like autoexpect, you will certainly want to make modifications from there.)
As mentioned above, WWW::Mechanize is a browser (to be more exact, it is a web client or http client) that happens to be programmable. The last time I looked, there was even work in progress to make it support JavaScript.
In addition to Selenium, if you're doing the Ruby/Rails thing, there's Webrat.