pdf.js/external/dist/webpack.js

29 lines
921 B
JavaScript
Raw Normal View History

/* Copyright 2022 Mozilla Foundation
2017-02-25 04:33:18 +09:00
*
* Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
* you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
* You may obtain a copy of the License at
*
* http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
*
* Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
* distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
* WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
* See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
* limitations under the License.
*/
/* eslint-disable import/no-commonjs */
[api-minor] Remove the Webpack-only npm dependencies from `pdfjs-dist` (PR 11418 follow-up) Currently *all* users of `pdfjs-dist` are forced to install the `webpack` and `worker-loader` packages, despite the fact that they are *only* relevant if the `webpack.js` file is being used (with a custom Webpack build). This really doesn't seem great, especially since those packages are the only remaining dependencies in the `pdfjs-dist` library, and it thus seem more reasonable overall that Webpack users handle those dependencies themselves. To prevent unnecessarily cryptic runtime failures, when people update to newer `pdfjs-dist` versions, the `webpack.js` file was updated to explicitly check for the existence of the `worker-loader` package and error otherwise. Furthermore, note that `webpack` was only listed as a dependency because of the `worker-loader` package itself (see issue 9248). Obviously these changes may not be seen as great by Webpack users who rely on `pdfjs-dist`, since it forces them to handle the dependencies themselves, however it should improve things considerably for "general" users of `pdfjs-dist` by not burdening them with unnecessary dependencies. These sort of changes are also in line with other recent changes, see PR 11418, which removed built-in fake worker loader code for specific JS builders/bundlers/frameworks. This work was prompted not only by a desire to simplify/clean-up old code, but also to lessen future support burden since the PDF.js contributors cannot be assumed to be experts in various JS bundlers.
2020-01-06 02:26:01 +09:00
Enable auto-formatting of the entire code-base using Prettier (issue 11444) Note that Prettier, purposely, has only limited [configuration options](https://prettier.io/docs/en/options.html). The configuration file is based on [the one in `mozilla central`](https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/.prettierrc) with just a few additions (to avoid future breakage if the defaults ever changes). Prettier is being used for a couple of reasons: - To be consistent with `mozilla-central`, where Prettier is already in use across the tree. - To ensure a *consistent* coding style everywhere, which is automatically enforced during linting (since Prettier is used as an ESLint plugin). This thus ends "all" formatting disussions once and for all, removing the need for review comments on most stylistic matters. Many ESLint options are now redundant, and I've tried my best to remove all the now unnecessary options (but I may have missed some). Note also that since Prettier considers the `printWidth` option as a guide, rather than a hard rule, this patch resorts to a small hack in the ESLint config to ensure that *comments* won't become too long. *Please note:* This patch is generated automatically, by appending the `--fix` argument to the ESLint call used in the `gulp lint` task. It will thus require some additional clean-up, which will be done in a *separate* commit. (On a more personal note, I'll readily admit that some of the changes Prettier makes are *extremely* ugly. However, in the name of consistency we'll probably have to live with that.)
2019-12-25 23:59:37 +09:00
"use strict";
2017-02-25 04:33:18 +09:00
[api-major] Output JavaScript modules in the builds (issue 10317) At this point in time all browsers, and also Node.js, support standard `import`/`export` statements and we can now finally consider outputting modern JavaScript modules in the builds.[1] In order for this to work we can *only* use proper `import`/`export` statements throughout the main code-base, and (as expected) our Node.js support made this much more complicated since both the official builds and the GitHub Actions-based tests must keep working.[2] One remaining issue is that the `pdf.scripting.js` file cannot be built as a JavaScript module, since doing so breaks PDF scripting. Note that my initial goal was to try and split these changes into a couple of commits, however that unfortunately didn't really work since it turned out to be difficult for smaller patches to work correctly and pass (all) tests that way.[3] This is a classic case of every change requiring a couple of other changes, with each of those changes requiring further changes in turn and the size/scope quickly increasing as a result. One possible "issue" with these changes is that we'll now only output JavaScript modules in the builds, which could perhaps be a problem with older tools. However it unfortunately seems far too complicated/time-consuming for us to attempt to support both the old and modern module formats, hence the alternative would be to do "nothing" here and just keep our "old" builds.[4] --- [1] The final blocker was module support in workers in Firefox, which was implemented in Firefox 114; please see https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Statements/import#browser_compatibility [2] It's probably possible to further improve/simplify especially the Node.js-specific code, but it does appear to work as-is. [3] Having partially "broken" patches, that fail tests, as part of the commit history is *really not* a good idea in general. [4] Outputting JavaScript modules was first requested almost five years ago, see issue 10317, and nowadays there *should* be much better support for JavaScript modules in various tools.
2023-09-28 20:00:10 +09:00
const pdfjs = require("./build/pdf.mjs");
Enable auto-formatting of the entire code-base using Prettier (issue 11444) Note that Prettier, purposely, has only limited [configuration options](https://prettier.io/docs/en/options.html). The configuration file is based on [the one in `mozilla central`](https://searchfox.org/mozilla-central/source/.prettierrc) with just a few additions (to avoid future breakage if the defaults ever changes). Prettier is being used for a couple of reasons: - To be consistent with `mozilla-central`, where Prettier is already in use across the tree. - To ensure a *consistent* coding style everywhere, which is automatically enforced during linting (since Prettier is used as an ESLint plugin). This thus ends "all" formatting disussions once and for all, removing the need for review comments on most stylistic matters. Many ESLint options are now redundant, and I've tried my best to remove all the now unnecessary options (but I may have missed some). Note also that since Prettier considers the `printWidth` option as a guide, rather than a hard rule, this patch resorts to a small hack in the ESLint config to ensure that *comments* won't become too long. *Please note:* This patch is generated automatically, by appending the `--fix` argument to the ESLint call used in the `gulp lint` task. It will thus require some additional clean-up, which will be done in a *separate* commit. (On a more personal note, I'll readily admit that some of the changes Prettier makes are *extremely* ugly. However, in the name of consistency we'll probably have to live with that.)
2019-12-25 23:59:37 +09:00
if (typeof window !== "undefined" && "Worker" in window) {
pdfjs.GlobalWorkerOptions.workerPort = new Worker(
[api-major] Output JavaScript modules in the builds (issue 10317) At this point in time all browsers, and also Node.js, support standard `import`/`export` statements and we can now finally consider outputting modern JavaScript modules in the builds.[1] In order for this to work we can *only* use proper `import`/`export` statements throughout the main code-base, and (as expected) our Node.js support made this much more complicated since both the official builds and the GitHub Actions-based tests must keep working.[2] One remaining issue is that the `pdf.scripting.js` file cannot be built as a JavaScript module, since doing so breaks PDF scripting. Note that my initial goal was to try and split these changes into a couple of commits, however that unfortunately didn't really work since it turned out to be difficult for smaller patches to work correctly and pass (all) tests that way.[3] This is a classic case of every change requiring a couple of other changes, with each of those changes requiring further changes in turn and the size/scope quickly increasing as a result. One possible "issue" with these changes is that we'll now only output JavaScript modules in the builds, which could perhaps be a problem with older tools. However it unfortunately seems far too complicated/time-consuming for us to attempt to support both the old and modern module formats, hence the alternative would be to do "nothing" here and just keep our "old" builds.[4] --- [1] The final blocker was module support in workers in Firefox, which was implemented in Firefox 114; please see https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Statements/import#browser_compatibility [2] It's probably possible to further improve/simplify especially the Node.js-specific code, but it does appear to work as-is. [3] Having partially "broken" patches, that fail tests, as part of the commit history is *really not* a good idea in general. [4] Outputting JavaScript modules was first requested almost five years ago, see issue 10317, and nowadays there *should* be much better support for JavaScript modules in various tools.
2023-09-28 20:00:10 +09:00
new URL("./build/pdf.worker.mjs", import.meta.url),
{ type: "module" }
);
}
2017-02-25 04:33:18 +09:00
module.exports = pdfjs;