Prev: The Most Challenging Interview Question
Next: typeof eval("(function F(){})")
From: Garrett Smith on 7 May 2010 03:57
I am experiencing a lot of problems using google.com search results,
GMail, and google groups today. I am using Firefox 3.6.3 with all
javascript enabled.

Tonight I am getting errors that are numbers:

".206"
".206"
".104"

Indeed it in the source, I see:

| throw new Error(".104");

The layout for... wait. I am getting the OLD layout now. Haha, yay they
finally fixed it. JUST NOW, as I type this message.

Apparently somebody totally screwed up and broke Google.com search
results. Took em all day but they finally fixed it, but I swear, all of
today, the layout for the search results page showed the google "sprite"
image overlapping the search results, making it very hard to read the
first two results.

Too bad I did not get a screen shot of that.

It is amazing and pitiful at the same time. Google is a major tech
company, Firefox is a great browser, the page should be really simple to
make, just HTML, CSS, and some script enhancements. Why oh why do they
set such a bad example? I suppose it is a good example of Google Closure
library in action.
--
Garrett
comp.lang.javascript FAQ: http://jibbering.com/faq/
From: David Mark on 7 May 2010 04:26
Garrett Smith wrote:
> I am experiencing a lot of problems using google.com search results,
> GMail, and google groups today. I am using Firefox 3.6.3 with all
> javascript enabled.

They all throw errors periodically for me, no matter what browser I use
(though the main site is the rarest offender). GG always barfs in Opera
10.5. I suppose if I go back one version at a time, I might hit the one
used by the developers (and therefore have some shot of the page
working). That's what observational programming does for you (software
as time capsule).

>
> Tonight I am getting errors that are numbers:
>
> ".206"
> ".206"
> ".104"
>
> Indeed it in the source, I see:
>
> | throw new Error(".104");

LOL. That looks like Googledygook.

>
> The layout for... wait. I am getting the OLD layout now. Haha, yay they
> finally fixed it. JUST NOW, as I type this message.

They are watching us all. :)

>
> Apparently somebody totally screwed up and broke Google.com search
> results. Took em all day but they finally fixed it, but I swear, all of
> today, the layout for the search results page showed the google "sprite"
> image overlapping the search results, making it very hard to read the
> first two results.
>
> Too bad I did not get a screen shot of that.

Why? Everyone already knows their developers are incompetent (except
their developers of course). The perverse thing is that many other
firms use that fact as an excuse to be incompetent themselves (good
enough for Google!) They forget that they don't have Google's money
(which can minimize a lot of major problems).

>
> It is amazing and pitiful at the same time. Google is a major tech
> company, Firefox is a great browser, the page should be really simple to
> make, just HTML, CSS, and some script enhancements. Why oh why do they
> set such a bad example? I suppose it is a good example of Google Closure
> library in action.

Probably. That dog don't hunt.
From: Gregor Kofler on 7 May 2010 05:19
Am 2010-05-07 09:57, Garrett Smith meinte:

[Google web page]

> It is amazing and pitiful at the same time. Google is a major tech
> company, Firefox is a great browser, the page should be really simple to
> make, just HTML, CSS, and some script enhancements. Why oh why do they
> set such a bad example? I suppose it is a good example of Google Closure
> library in action.

It "looks" ok (now), but the validator still points out 121 errors and
38 warnings (on the super-simple start page, of course). Pathetic.

Gregor


--
http://www.gregorkofler.com
From: Ivan S on 7 May 2010 05:23
On May 7, 9:57 am, Garrett Smith <dhtmlkitc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> I am experiencing a lot of problems using google.com search results,
> GMail, and google groups today. I am using Firefox 3.6.3 with all
> javascript enabled.

I've noticed that GMail throws (I guess ajax related) errors in FF
after some time.
From: Garrett Smith on 7 May 2010 13:03
David Mark wrote:
> Garrett Smith wrote:
>> I am experiencing a lot of problems using google.com search results,
>> GMail, and google groups today. I am using Firefox 3.6.3 with all
>> javascript enabled.
>
[...]
>
>> Tonight I am getting errors that are numbers:
>>
>> ".206"
>> ".206"
>> ".104"
>>
>> Indeed it in the source, I see:
>>
>> | throw new Error(".104");
>
> LOL. That looks like Googledygook.
>

They probably have "error codes" table somewhere.

More:

| try{}catch(u){}

and

| <ol onmouseover="return true"

[...]

Try Firefox plugin "Javascript Deobfuscator" to see more.

>> Apparently somebody totally screwed up and broke Google.com search
>> results. Took em all day but they finally fixed it, but I swear, all of
>> today, the layout for the search results page showed the google "sprite"
>> image overlapping the search results, making it very hard to read the
>> first two results.
>>
>> Too bad I did not get a screen shot of that.
>
Now I have the new layout again; I see the issue.

Screenshot:
<http://dhtmlkitchen.com/img/blog/google.com.jpg>

Notice how the google sprite is displayed and overlaps the search result.

Am I the only one seeing this? FF 3.6.3 on Windows. I saw google.com
looking ok on another Firefox 3.5 on Mac.

NoScript is allowing all scripts there, too (otherwise a notice would be
displayed such as "Scripts Partially Allowed..." or "Scripts Currently
Forbidden".

Regardless, the sprite problem should not be a js issue. CSS Sprites are
created using one image and setting the css background-position,
normally in the stylesheet.

> Why? Everyone already knows their developers are incompetent (except

Many, if not most non-developers tend to disagree.

> their developers of course). The perverse thing is that many other
> firms use that fact as an excuse to be incompetent themselves (good
> enough for Google!) They forget that they don't have Google's money
> (which can minimize a lot of major problems).
>

When I have made arguments about the importance of HTML validity, how it
causes javascript to work differently, how its use is expecting
error-correction, they have, on occasion, been downplayed with
justifications like:

"Who validates?" - "this is working fine" - "Look at any major site.
Even google.com doesn't validate. Do you really think it is that
important?"
--
Garrett
comp.lang.javascript FAQ: http://jibbering.com/faq/
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: The Most Challenging Interview Question
Next: typeof eval("(function F(){})")