3 ms·
One thing that helps Chrome release often is that the api for building extensions is all javascript. By comparison, Firefox extensions can have binary component
by celticjames 16y ago
One thing that helps Chrome release often is that the api for building extensions is all javascript. By comparison, Firefox extensions can have binary components. This means there needs to be a certain amount of platform stability or extensions will break every six weeks. I think that in the future we'll see faster release cycles for Firefox as the api for extension building becomes more js based and less dependent on xpcom components.
- lawfulfalafel 16y agoI don't know about that. I would love to have an extension that made the omnibar a lot more like firefox's awesomebar (good indexing, can search for key phrases for title of article and the such) but to my knowledge that's pretty much impossible because of the javascript limitation (I hope I'm wrong here, not really sure). I just wish google was a bit more subtle about wishing people search on google again when looking for previously viewed sites.
- IChrisI 16y agoFunny, I wish Firefox's awesome bar let me press enter to go to the first result without pressing down first.
- hokkos 16y agoChrome extensions can have binary componants with NPAPI : http://code.google.com/chrome/extensions/npapi.html http://code.google.com/chrome/extensions/npapi.html
- cookiecaper 16y agoAlmost every extension I've tried has worked fine on Firefox 4, and certainly between the 3.x releases. While you might be right that this should be considered occasionally, it doesn't seem to be a big deal.
- IgorPartola 16y agoFirebug, HTTP Live Headers, AdBlock Plus and a slew of other extensions I typically use do not work until a late beta is out.