检测浏览器功能支持的最可靠方法是什么？ [英] What is the most reliable approach to detecting browser feature support?

问题描述

假设我想检测对通知的支持（ http://notifications.spec.whatwg.org/ ）在JavaScript库中。

Let's say I want to detect support for notifications (http://notifications.spec.whatwg.org/) in a JavaScript library.

我可以使用 window.Notification！== undefined 。但是，如果库（或其他库）的用户也有某种全局通知对象被定义为完全不同的目的呢？

I can use window.Notification !== undefined. But what if the users of the library (or another library) also have some kind of global Notification object defined for completely different purpose?

另一方面，如果另一个库是polyfill怎么办？然后他们的通知对象是可以接受的。除了测试全局对象之外，我应该测试所有方法吗？

On the other hand, what if the other library is a polyfill? Then their Notification object is acceptable. Should I test for all methods in addition to testing for the global object?

更新：

我注意到一个有趣的事情在一个通知polyfill ：

ret[toString] = function() {
    return 'function Notification() { [native code] }';
};

依靠这样的东西检测它是否是原生/填充对象有多可靠？

How reliable is relying on something like that to detect whether it is a native/polyfill object?

推荐答案

所以基本上有两种选择。

So essentially there are two choices.

首先是尝试和依赖'函数Notification（）{[native code]}' toString value，因为它是由某些人设置的至少是polyfills。不幸的是，这不可靠，因为我没有找到关于它是否是polyfill作者中常见方法的信息，以及它是否是浏览器中可靠的返回值。

First is to try and rely on 'function Notification() { [native code] }' toString value, as it is being set by some polyfills at least. Unfortunately, this not reliable, as I found no information on whether it is a common approach within polyfill authors and whether it is a reliable return value in browsers.

另一种选择，正如评论中所建议的那样，是忽略潜在的冲突，只是前进只是为了存在而进行测试。这就是我现在所用的。

Another option, as suggested in comments, is to ignore potential conflicts and just go forward just testing for existence. That's what I went with for now.

这篇关于检测浏览器功能支持的最可靠方法是什么？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！