Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [caplet] ADsafe[]

Expand Messages
  • Freeman, Tim
    Care to post a citation for the Firefox[-6] bug? Google doesn t do a very good job searching for [-6]. Sounds pretty bizarre, if -1, -3, and -6 are special.
    Message 1 of 5 , Apr 18 7:54 PM
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment

      Care to post a citation for the Firefox[-6] bug?  Google doesn't do a very good job searching for [-6].  Sounds pretty bizarre, if -1, -3, and -6 are special.

       

      From: caplet@yahoogroups.com [mailto:caplet@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Douglas Crockford
      Sent: Monday, April 18, 2011 6:38 PM
      To: caplet@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [caplet] ADsafe[]

       

       

      ADsafe took a big usability hit when the Firefox[-6] bug was discovered. ADsafe took the necessary but highly undesirable step of outlawing the use of the [] subscript operator except when the subscript expression was a non-negative number or an approved string.

      Thanks to a suggestion by Jasvir Nagra, ADsafe allows [] for all number literals as well as strings starting with '-'. It also accepts subscripts that are expressions that can be easily determined to be strings.

      adsafe.js's initialization now contains the following (which, coincidentally, demonstrates the Principle of Correspondence):

      if (Function.__defineGetter__) {
      (function (p, f) {
      p.__defineGetter__('-1', f);
      p.__defineGetter__('-3', f);
      p.__defineGetter__('-6', f);
      }(Function.prototype, function () {
      return null;
      }));
      }

      For browsers that have a __defineGetter__ method, that method will be used to install getters for [-1], [-3], and [-6] that will return null. This is thought to plug the Firefox leak.

      JSLint will now allow subscript expressions where the outermost operator is one of these prefix operators

      - + ~ typeof

      or one of these infix operators

      - * / % & | << >> >>>

    • Douglas Crockford
      ... https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=507453 http://www.thespanner.co.uk/2009/07/14/hidden-firefox-properties-revisited/
      Message 2 of 5 , Apr 19 9:13 AM
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In caplet@yahoogroups.com, "Freeman, Tim" <tim.freeman@...> wrote:
        >
        > Care to post a citation for the Firefox[-6] bug? Google doesn't do a very good job searching for [-6]. Sounds pretty bizarre, if -1, -3, and -6 are special.


        https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=507453

        http://www.thespanner.co.uk/2009/07/14/hidden-firefox-properties-revisited/
      • Brendan Eich
        ... So, fixed in Firefox 3.5 and 3.6 patch releases. Firefox 4 is out already. Is anyone seeing hits from downrev Firefoxes? /be_._,___
        Message 3 of 5 , Apr 19 10:58 AM
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          On Apr 19, 2011, at 9:13 AM, Douglas Crockford wrote:

           

          --- In caplet@yahoogroups.com, "Freeman, Tim" <tim.freeman@...> wrote:
          >
          > Care to post a citation for the Firefox[-6] bug? Google doesn't do a very good job searching for [-6]. Sounds pretty bizarre, if -1, -3, and -6 are special.

          https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=507453


          So, fixed in Firefox 3.5 and 3.6 patch releases. Firefox 4 is out already. Is anyone seeing hits from downrev Firefoxes?

          /be_._,___

        • Douglas Crockford
          ... This is the Firefox distribution I see at Yahoo: 4.0 1.60% 3.6 21.78% 3.5 2.99% 3.0 1.93% 2.0 0.39%
          Message 4 of 5 , Apr 19 1:37 PM
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In caplet@yahoogroups.com, Brendan Eich <brendan@...> wrote:
            >
            > On Apr 19, 2011, at 9:13 AM, Douglas Crockford wrote:
            >
            > > --- In caplet@yahoogroups.com, "Freeman, Tim" <tim.freeman@> wrote:
            > > >
            > > > Care to post a citation for the Firefox[-6] bug? Google doesn't do a very good job searching for [-6]. Sounds pretty bizarre, if -1, -3, and -6 are special.
            > >
            > > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=507453
            > >
            >
            > So, fixed in Firefox 3.5 and 3.6 patch releases. Firefox 4 is out already. Is anyone seeing hits from downrev Firefoxes?


            This is the Firefox distribution I see at Yahoo:

            4.0 1.60%
            3.6 21.78%
            3.5 2.99%
            3.0 1.93%
            2.0 0.39%
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.