Thank you for reporting this bug. We will make it our priority to review this report.
  1. #21
    Sencha - Community Support Team mystix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    6,236
    Vote Rating
    5
    mystix will become famous soon enough

      0  

    Default


    Quote Originally Posted by MindPatterns View Post
    I'd vote for the isXUL-check, though it introduces some overhead. Depending on the behavior of future FF's, I could also live with the try/catch solution for now.
    i say let FF take the isXUL() hit for being stupid for almost a decade
    (i still like most parts of FF though )

    anyways, it can always be tweaked with a simple version check in future should the problem finally be fixed.

  2. #22
    Sencha - Community Support Team mystix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    6,236
    Vote Rating
    5
    mystix will become famous soon enough

      0  

    Default


    Quote Originally Posted by MindPatterns View Post
    This chaining is giving me the creeps ... is that the best we can do to check for a XUL Element?
    short of a try-catch block -- yes.

  3. #23
    Sencha - Community Support Team mschwartz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    San Diego, Peoples' Republic of California
    Posts
    2,053
    Vote Rating
    17
    mschwartz will become famous soon enough mschwartz will become famous soon enough

      0  

    Default


    Quote Originally Posted by MindPatterns View Post
    This chaining is giving me the creeps ... is that the best we can do to check for a XUL Element?
    Yes, exactly for the reasons posted.

    Firebug lies to me.

    The element in question is actually of type "thumb" and is a chrome element. You certainly cannot access any property of it. I think we're fortunate to be able to even do typeof on it.

    And the code you made red is the guts of isXUL(), but why add even that overhead of calling the isXUL() function?

  4. #24
    Sencha - Community Support Team mschwartz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    San Diego, Peoples' Republic of California
    Posts
    2,053
    Vote Rating
    17
    mschwartz will become famous soon enough mschwartz will become famous soon enough

      0  

    Default


    try my patch and see if it works?

  5. #25
    Sencha User ThorstenSuckow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Aachen, Germany
    Posts
    597
    Vote Rating
    2
    ThorstenSuckow is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    Quote Originally Posted by mschwartz View Post
    Yes, exactly for the reasons posted.

    Firebug lies to me.

    The element in question is actually of type "thumb" and is a chrome element. You certainly cannot access any property of it. I think we're fortunate to be able to even do typeof on it.

    And the code you made red is the guts of isXUL(), but why add even that overhead of calling the isXUL() function?
    Absolutely, I'd vote for that since we do not need another function call then - however, it's still unclear to me if that code can be applied to FF browsers prior to 3.5 - depending on their behavior a method might be necessary to do further checks. Currently browsing some docs to see if FF has some native JS functions that could identify an element as a XUL element...

  6. #26
    Sencha - Community Support Team mschwartz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    San Diego, Peoples' Republic of California
    Posts
    2,053
    Vote Rating
    17
    mschwartz will become famous soon enough mschwartz will become famous soon enough

      0  

    Default


    Quote Originally Posted by MindPatterns View Post
    Absolutely, I'd vote for that since we do not need another function call then - however, it's still unclear to me if that code can be applied to FF browsers prior to 3.5 - depending on their behavior a method might be necessary to do further checks. Currently browsing some docs to see if FF has some native JS functions that could identify an element as a XUL element...
    I tested it in 3.0 and it works.

  7. #27
    Sencha User ThorstenSuckow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Aachen, Germany
    Posts
    597
    Vote Rating
    2
    ThorstenSuckow is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    Quote Originally Posted by mschwartz View Post

    Firebug lies to me.

    The element in question is actually of type "thumb" and is a chrome element.
    You get either something like

    Code:
    <thumb sbattr="scrollbar-thumb" inherits="orient,sborient=orient,collapsed=disabled" align="center" pack="center" orient="vertical" sborient="vertical"/>
    or

    Code:
    <slider orient="vertical" sborient="vertical" curpos="0" maxpos="537" pageincrement="146" increment="19" flex="1" inherits="disabled,curpos,maxpos,pageincrement,increment,orient,sborient=orient"><thumb sbattr="scrollbar-thumb" inherits="orient,sborient=orient,collapsed=disabled" align="center" pack="center" orient="vertical" sborient="vertical"/></slider>
    depending on the location your mouse pointer entered the scrollbar. Unfortunately, accessing any property will fail (as mystix already said) - what is the "typeof/instanceof" check you were speaking of?

  8. #28
    Sencha - Community Support Team mschwartz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    San Diego, Peoples' Republic of California
    Posts
    2,053
    Vote Rating
    17
    mschwartz will become famous soon enough mschwartz will become famous soon enough

      0  

    Default


    Object.prototype.toString.call(el) === '[object XULElement]'

    is sorta like doing typeof

  9. #29
    Sencha User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    191
    Vote Rating
    0
    temporary is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    Hmm I'm fighting with the same problem right now, but with ext 2.2.1

    Tried the "(el && Ext.isGecko && Object.prototype.toString.call(el) === '[object XULElement]')" version, but I'm still getting the dom error... So I added a console.log(Object.prototype.toString.call(el)) to contains() AFTER the check.

    And this is the result:
    [object HTMLDivElement]
    Permission denied to access property 'dom' from a non-chrome context

    The error occurs when moving fast inside a toolbar with buttons and a TriggerField.

    How can this be?

  10. #30
    Sencha - Community Support Team mschwartz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    San Diego, Peoples' Republic of California
    Posts
    2,053
    Vote Rating
    17
    mschwartz will become famous soon enough mschwartz will become famous soon enough

      0  

    Default


    Quote Originally Posted by temporary View Post
    Hmm I'm fighting with the same problem right now, but with ext 2.2.1

    Tried the "(el && Ext.isGecko && Object.prototype.toString.call(el) === '[object XULElement]')" version, but I'm still getting the dom error... So I added a console.log(Object.prototype.toString.call(el)) to contains() AFTER the check.

    And this is the result:
    [object HTMLDivElement]
    Permission denied to access property 'dom' from a non-chrome context

    The error occurs when moving fast inside a toolbar with buttons and a TriggerField.

    How can this be?
    Firebug lies.

    You need to do something like var x = el and examine that.

    The reason is that events still occur after your breakpoint is hit and the value of el may not be what you think it is.

    You can try adding this:
    console.dir(el)
    before the if statement

    And I haven't looked at Ext 2.2.x in a while, it may not even have a within() function that is called?

Turkiyenin en sevilen filmlerinin yer aldigi xnxx internet sitemiz olan ve porn sex tarzi bir site olan mobil porno izle sitemiz gercekten dillere destan bir durumda herkesin sevdigi bir site olarak tarihe gececege benziyor. Sitenin en belirgin ozelliklerinden birisi de Turkiyede gercekten kaliteli ve muntazam, duzenli porno izle siteleri olmamasidir. Bu yuzden iste. Ayrica en net goruntu kalitesine sahip adresinde yayinlanmaktadir. Mesela diğer sitelerimizden bahsedecek olursak, en iyi hd porno video arşivine sahip bir siteyiz. "The Best anal porn videos and slut anus, big asses movies set..."