- ApocalypeX
- |
- Fabled Heroic Member
Five years older and wiser
The fires are burning, I'm fire, never tire
Slay warriors in the forests, and on hire
Posted by: DavidJCobb
Posted by: ApocalypeX
Or you could just ask for someone to port the script...If the userscript uses @require or any GM_ functions, then it cannot be ported to Chrome as these things are still unsupported. (Such a scenario is highly likely; @require is often used to load jQuery, and any script that needs to save data without risking data loss will use GM_getValue and GM_setValue.) Someone would have to convert it into a Google Chrome Extension.
Which is absolutely, absolutely not worth the trouble. They'd have to rewrite the entire script to work with Chrome's indescribably-pathetic API. The limitations are enormous; most Greasemonkey functions (including ANYTHING that needs to operate with on-page JavaScript in ANY WAY) would be unable to function in any capacity if converted to Chrome Extensions.
Basically, most userscripts can't be made Chrome-compatible (or would be exceedingly difficult) because Chrome decided to do things their own way, and their own way... Well, it sucks. Hard.
Why are you telling me this? I've spent a year+ doing this stuff. And you are wrong, there are alternatives to GM functions. GM_*Value = localStorage, GM_XHTR = XHTP, GM_addStyle = Simple javascript to add css etc.
It's laziness and lack of time. Most of the old scripts don't even work so there is no point in me saying "Oh today I will spend my day porting over scripts!!! YAY!". If someone asked me to, I would, e.g. Duardo asked me to port Posting Tools to Chome, bam done. All the GM_functions I switched to chrome compatible ones.
Chrome's API doesn't suck it's just userscripts weren't intended for Chrome when they where invented, heck Chrome didn't even exist. You should be happy chrome even supports them because it doesn't really have to since it supports extensions which are far more superior to addons or GM userscripts.
/rant