I’m going to have to go down the rabbit hole of making my own website soon. Just curious but would there be an easy way to show a pop up just to people using chrome?

No reason in particular… 😏

[–] [email protected] 18 points 4 days ago (1 children)

lol i did something like what i assume your goal is on my neocities when i detect !!window.chrome === true

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Why the double negation?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 4 days ago (1 children)

It's a handy way to convert any value to a Boolean. If window.chrome is defined and done non-empty value, double negation turns it into just true.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 days ago (2 children)

I've been wondering why not window.chrome == true or Boolean(window.chrome), but it turns out that the former doesn't work and that == has essentially no use unless you remember some completely arbitrary rules, and that JS developers would complain that the latter is too long given the fact that I've seen javascript code using !0 for true and !1 for false, instead of just true and false because they can save 2 to 3 characters that way.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago

I've never seen the !0 and !1, it is dumb and indicates either young or terrible devs.

Boolean(window.chrome) is the best, !!window.chrome is good, no need to test if it's equal to true if you make it a boolean beforehand.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 days ago

== has essentially no use unless you remember some completely arbitrary rules

If you make sure the types match, like by explicitly converting things on the same line on that example, then you can use it just like if it was ===.

In fact, there are people that defend that if your code behaves differently when you switch those two operators, your code is wrong. (Personally, I defend that JS it a pile of dogshit, and you should avoid going to dig there.)

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 days ago

JS "idiomatic" way to cast to boolean. But could just be written as !window.chrome instead.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 4 days ago

Not sure if serious, but there's a million ways to do this, some that require importing thousands of lines of code and none of which are guaranteed to work in all possible circumstances. But here's a simple one.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Im stupid Stones but I think it's in the user agent information, browser and version and other shit

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 days ago (1 children)

User agents cannot be fully trusted anymore since every browser puts every possible word in it so they are not excluded by anything.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago

Well, some browsers have made User-Agent strings useless. Technically, it's like this:

Firefox: "Mozilla based browser, Gecko engine, Firefox."

Chromium: "We're totally a Mozilla based browser we swear. Also KHTML, which is like Gecko basically. I guess also a bit like WebKit. Has anyone ever heard of those? No? OK. Fine, here's some actual information then..."