4 ms·
> it's horrible for developers to use and no-one I know advocates it I've seen developers advocate for document.write to inject locally-hosted JavaScript as a
by rossy 9y ago
> it's horrible for developers to use and no-one I know advocates it
I've seen developers advocate for document.write to inject locally-hosted JavaScript as a fallback for when CDNs are down:
https://www.hanselman.com/blog/CDNsFailButYourScriptsDontHaveToFallbackFromCDNToLocalJQuery.aspx https://www.hanselman.com/blog/CDNsFailButYourScriptsDontHav...
I definitely don't agree with this method, but there you go. Apparently ASP.NET 4.5 will even insert this pattern automatically.
- CrystalGamma 9y agoYou could still insert <script> elements, you just wouldn't do it with document.write().
- pygy_ 9y agoI may be wrong, but I think that document.write() will load the script synchronously while inserting a `script` element will not.
- acdha 9y agoYou can set async=false on a dynamic script element to avoid the default asynchronous behaviour.
- pygy_ 9y agoI just looked at the support matrix: IE10+. So it is reasonably supported nowadays, nice :-)
- acdha 9y agoWorking on the web is refreshing like that these days — so many things which used to be painful are now just standards + “Microsoft doesn't support that old version of IE and neither do we”.