12 ms·
That's not a good analogy. With chrome extension you (almost) always need a background.html, background.js, popup.html, etc. Perhaps chrome extensions would be
by polskibus 14y ago
That's not a good analogy. With chrome extension you (almost) always need a background.html, background.js, popup.html, etc. Perhaps chrome extensions would be better if you started by defining a class or writing functions without unnecessary html tags and files. This is a bit different than html and bootstrap where you often dont need most of the framework.
- swader 14y agoIn a way, you're both right. Chrome Extension development is far more difficult to get started in than it should be. The documentation is lax at best and it's only starting to heat up, and the trouble one can have with Chrome having to be restarted all the time for the changes to take effect on Ubuntu (and maybe other OSs, I don't know) is highly discouraging. On the other hand, you really don't need anything I put together in order to develop an extension, but it's useful for getting off the ground faster.