This repository was archived by the owner on Dec 3, 2021. It is now read-only.
fix: be defensive around use of window.WebSocket #24
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -11,6 +11,8 @@ | |
| } | ||
| })(function(global, navigator) { | ||
|
|
||
| var WebSocket = global.WebSocket | ||
|
|
||
| var RobustWebSocket = function(url, protocols, userOptions) { | ||
| var realWs = { close: function() {} }, | ||
| connectTimeout, | ||
|
|
@@ -75,6 +77,12 @@ | |
| } | ||
|
|
||
| self.send = function() { | ||
| if (realWs.readyState !== self.OPEN) { | ||
| throw Object.assign( | ||
| new Error('An attempt was made to use a WebSocket that is not usable'), | ||
| { name: 'InvalidStateError' } | ||
| ) | ||
| } | ||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Why would we try to re-implement the WebSocket standard? calling
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. As previously stated -
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. But that's not what this code is checking. If you want to check for th3 existence of send and throw an Error, that is acceptible. |
||
| return realWs.send.apply(realWs, arguments) | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
|
|
@@ -93,7 +101,7 @@ | |
| } | ||
|
|
||
| self.open = function() { | ||
| if (realWs.readyState !== self.OPEN && realWs.readyState !== self.CONNECTING) { | ||
| clearPendingReconnectIfNeeded() | ||
| reconnectWhenOnlineAgain = false | ||
| explicitlyClosed = false | ||
|
|
@@ -239,5 +247,16 @@ | |
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| ['CONNECTING' , 'OPEN', 'CLOSING', 'CLOSED'].forEach(function (name) { | ||
| const descriptor = { | ||
| writable: false, | ||
| enumerable: true, | ||
| configurable: false, | ||
| value: WebSocket[name], | ||
| } | ||
| Object.defineProperty(RobustWebSocket, name, descriptor) | ||
| Object.defineProperty(RobustWebSocket.prototype, name, descriptor) | ||
| }) | ||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. I'd be glad to take this change at |
||
|
|
||
| return RobustWebSocket | ||
| }, typeof window != 'undefined' ? window : (typeof global != 'undefined' ? global : this)); | ||
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This doesn't make sense. either a)
WebSocketis native and supported and never replaced, or b) it is polyfilled and we shouldn't close over and force the users to understand ordering of this library and the polyfill.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The reason for this change is for another option: WebSocket has been overriden by browser extensions and users want to ensure that RobustWebSocket's implementation doesn't change from under them.