3 ms·
That's interesting. I've only made some toy extensions for both Chrome and Firefox, and I've got an impression that Firefox's extension model is somehow more "p
by yokohummer7 11y ago
That's interesting. I've only made some toy extensions for both Chrome and Firefox, and I've got an impression that Firefox's extension model is somehow more "powerful", and Chrome's is a bit limited. But after reading the experiences shown in this thread, it seems that Firefox's model is actually harder to use in practice. Would this be related to the maxim that "less is better"?
- einaregilsson 11y agoThe old Firefox extension model, XUL/XPCOM is definitely a lot more powerful. You can basically access anything and do anything. On the other hand much of it is not documented and you're on your own in figuring out how it works. But they're trying to move people off that model, and onto the Add-on SDK or the chrome model, which is a lot easier to work with, and better documented.