Versions of `needle` prior to `2.5.0` cannot cope with redirects (as documented: https://github.com/tomas/needle/issues/312).
This prevents prebuilt `canvas` binaries from being downloaded on MacOS,
requiring the global install of its dependencies.
Updating Needle restores it to functionality, addressing this. It also avoids
the need to add `request` to `package.json`; it also obsoletes https://github.com/mozilla/pdf.js/pull/12018.
For now we need to use a Babel-plugin, since Webpack 4.x doesn't seem to support it yet. (Most likely we'll have to update to Webpack 5, once that becomes available, in order for this to be directly supported. This is thus also blocked on removing the `webpack-stream` package.)
While the `??` operator will thus always be transpiled by Babel, even in modern builds, simply supporting it for development purposes seems like a step in the right direction.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Operators/Nullish_coalescing_operator
By updating to the new major version of Acorn, we'll get support for newer ECMAScript features as they become available (although some features are currently also blocked by ESLint support and/or SystemJS usage).
Please see https://github.com/acornjs/acorn/releases/tag/7.2.0 for details.
With these changes SystemJS is now only used, during development, on the worker-thread and in the unit/font-tests, since Firefox is currently missing support for worker modules; please see https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1247687
Hence all the JavaScript files in the `web/` and `src/display/` folders are now loaded *natively* by the browser (during development) using standard `import` statements/calls, thanks to a nice `import-maps` polyfill.
*Please note:* As soon as https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1247687 is fixed in Firefox, we should be able to remove all traces of SystemJS and thus finally be able to use every possible modern JavaScript feature.
This commit replaces our own infrastructure for handling browsers during
tests with Puppeteer. Using our own infrastructure for this had a few
downsides:
- It has proven to not always be reliable, especially when closing the
browser, causing failures on the bots because browsers were still
running even though they should have been stopped. Puppeteer should do
a better job with this because it uses the browser's test built-in
instrumentation tools for this (the devtools protocol) which our code
didn't. This also means that we don't have to pass
parameters/preferences to tweak browser behavior anymore.
- It requires the browsers under test to be installed on the system,
whereas Puppeteer downloads the browsers before the test. This means
that setup is much easier (no more manual installations and browser
manifest files) as well as testing with different browser versions
(since they can be provisioned on demand). Moreover, this ensures that
contributors always run the tests in both Firefox and Chrome,
regardless of which browsers they have installed locally.
- It's all code we have to maintain, so Puppeteer abstracts away how the
browsers start/stop for us so we don't have to keep that code.
By default, Puppeteer only installs one browser during installation,
hence the need for a post-install script to install the second browser.
This requires `cross-env` to make passing the environment variable work
on both Linux and Windows.
Please note that these changes were done automatically, using `gulp lint --fix`.
Given that the major version number was increased, there's a fair number of (primarily whitespace) changes; please see https://prettier.io/blog/2020/03/21/2.0.0.html
In order to reduce the size of these changes somewhat, this patch maintains the old "arrowParens" style for now (once mozilla-central updates Prettier we can simply choose the same formatting, assuming it will differ here).
Having thought *briefly* about using `css-vars-ponyfill`, I'm no longer convinced that it'd be a good idea. The reason is that if we actually want to properly support CSS variables, then that functionality should be available in *all* of our CSS files.
Note in particular the `pdf_viewer.css` file that's built as part of the `COMPONENTS` target, in which case I really cannot see how a rewrite-at-the-client solution would ever be guaranteed to always work correctly and without accidentally touching other CSS in the surrounding application.
All-in-all, simply re-writing the CSS variables at build-time seems much easier and is thus the approach taken in this patch; courtesy of https://github.com/MadLittleMods/postcss-css-variables
By using its `preserve` option, the built files will thus include *both* a fallback and a modern `var(...)` format[1]. As a proof-of-concept this patch removes a couple of manually added fallback values, and converts an additional sidebar related property to use a CSS variable.
---
[1] Comparing the `master` branch with this patch, when using `gulp generic`, produces the following diff for the built `web/viewer.css` file:
```diff
@@ -408,6 +408,7 @@
:root {
--sidebar-width: 200px;
+ --sidebar-transition-duration: 200ms;
}
* {
@@ -550,27 +551,28 @@
position: absolute;
top: 32px;
bottom: 0;
- width: 200px; /* Here, and elsewhere below, keep the constant value for compatibility
- with older browsers that lack support for CSS variables. */
+ width: 200px;
width: var(--sidebar-width);
visibility: hidden;
z-index: 100;
border-top: 1px solid rgba(51, 51, 51, 1);
-webkit-transition-duration: 200ms;
transition-duration: 200ms;
+ -webkit-transition-duration: var(--sidebar-transition-duration);
+ transition-duration: var(--sidebar-transition-duration);
-webkit-transition-timing-function: ease;
transition-timing-function: ease;
}
html[dir='ltr'] #sidebarContainer {
-webkit-transition-property: left;
transition-property: left;
- left: -200px;
+ left: calc(-1 * 200px);
left: calc(-1 * var(--sidebar-width));
}
html[dir='rtl'] #sidebarContainer {
-webkit-transition-property: right;
transition-property: right;
- right: -200px;
+ right: calc(-1 * 200px);
right: calc(-1 * var(--sidebar-width));
}
@@ -640,6 +642,8 @@
#viewerContainer:not(.pdfPresentationMode) {
-webkit-transition-duration: 200ms;
transition-duration: 200ms;
+ -webkit-transition-duration: var(--sidebar-transition-duration);
+ transition-duration: var(--sidebar-transition-duration);
-webkit-transition-timing-function: ease;
transition-timing-function: ease;
}
```
https://npmjs.com/advisories/1084
webpack-stream between 4.0.3 and 5.0.0 added official support for Webpack 4. Which is nice since we ARE using Webpack 4... Also, dropped support for Node.js 4 which shouldn't be a big deal for us since we are already using packages that are incompatible with Node.js 4 (Webpack 4.x supports Node.js 6 and up).
For performance reasons, and to avoid hanging the browser UI, the PDF.js library should *always* be used with web workers enabled.
At this point in time all of the supported browsers should have proper worker support, and Node.js is thus the only environment where workers aren't supported. Hence it no longer seems relevant/necessary to provide, by default, fake worker loaders for various JS builders/bundlers/frameworks in the PDF.js code itself.[1]
In order to simplify things, the fake worker loader code is thus simplified to now *only* support Node.js usage respectively "normal" browser usage out-of-the-box.[2]
*Please note:* The officially intended way of using the PDF.js library is with workers enabled, which can be done by setting `GlobalWorkerOptions.workerSrc`, `GlobalWorkerOptions.workerPort`, or manually providing a `PDFWorker` instance when calling `getDocument`.
---
[1] Note that it's still possible to *manually* disable workers, simply my manually loading the built `pdf.worker.js` file into the (current) global scope, however this's mostly intended for testing/debugging purposes.
[2] Unfortunately some bundlers such as Webpack, when used with third-party deployments of the PDF.js library, will start to print `Critical dependency: ...` warnings when run against the built `pdf.js` file from this patch. The reason is that despite the `require` calls being protected by *runtime* `isNodeJS` checks, it's not possible to simply tell Webpack to just ignore the `require`; please see [Webpack issue 8826](https://github.com/webpack/webpack) and libraries such as [require-fool-webpack](https://github.com/sindresorhus/require-fool-webpack).
*Please note:* This patch does *not* prevent the 'default_preferences' task from running more than once during `npm test`, but it does ensure that the tasks won't run *concurrently* by running the relevant tests in *series*.
While it would obviously still make sense to re-factor the gulpfile to account for changes in `gulp` version 4, by at least tweaking the `npm test` command the intermittent failures on Travis should at least go away.
Compared to the recently replaced `URL` polyfill, the new `ReadableStream` polyfill isn't being exported globally for two reasons:
- We're currently checking for the existence of a global `ReadableStream` implementation when determining if the Fetch API will be used; please see `isFetchSupported` in the src/display/display_utils.js file.
- Given that it's much newer functionality (compared to `URL`) and that not all browsers may implement all parts of the specification yet, not exposing the `ReadableStream` globally seems safer for now.
This only required changing the import paths. The `es` folder contains
all polyfills we need now. If we want to import everything, we need to
explicitly require the `index` file.
This major version bump required two changes:
- The global line in the mobile viewer example should be removed because
the `.eslintrc` file already defines these globals and with the new
`eslint` version we otherwise get an error saying "'pdfjsLib' is already
defined as a built-in global variable".
- The ECMA version for the examples must be set to 6 since we're using
modules, otherwise we get an error saying "sourceType 'module' is not
supported when ecmaVersion < 2015". It turns out that the previous
version of `eslint` already used ECMA version 6 silently even though
we set 5, see https://github.com/eslint/eslint/issues/9687#issuecomment-432413384,
so in terms of our code nothing really changes.
