2018-02-09 03:59:46 +00:00
# Puppeteer
2018-01-11 08:28:36 +00:00
<!-- [START badges] -->
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
2022-06-24 11:55:21 +00:00
[](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/actions?query=workflow%3ACI) [](https://npmjs.org/package/puppeteer)
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
2018-01-11 08:28:36 +00:00
<!-- [END badges] -->
2017-06-19 23:37:55 +00:00
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
< img src = "https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/10379601/29446482-04f7036a-841f-11e7-9872-91d1fc2ea683.png" height = "200" align = "right" / >
2017-08-15 17:08:32 +00:00
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
###### [API](https://pptr.dev/api) | [FAQ](https://pptr.dev/faq) | [Contributing](https://pptr.dev/contributing) | [Troubleshooting](https://pptr.dev/troubleshooting)
2017-06-19 23:37:55 +00:00
2018-06-30 04:35:52 +00:00
> Puppeteer is a Node library which provides a high-level API to control Chrome or Chromium over the [DevTools Protocol](https://chromedevtools.github.io/devtools-protocol/). Puppeteer runs [headless](https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2017/04/headless-chrome) by default, but can be configured to run full (non-headless) Chrome or Chromium.
2017-07-28 02:21:24 +00:00
2018-01-11 08:28:36 +00:00
<!-- [START usecases] -->
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
##### What can I do?
2017-08-11 01:31:54 +00:00
Most things that you can do manually in the browser can be done using Puppeteer! Here are a few examples to get you started:
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
- Generate screenshots and PDFs of pages.
- Crawl a SPA (Single-Page Application) and generate pre-rendered content (i.e. "SSR" (Server-Side Rendering)).
- Automate form submission, UI testing, keyboard input, etc.
- Create an up-to-date, automated testing environment. Run your tests directly in the latest version of Chrome using the latest JavaScript and browser features.
- Capture a [timeline trace ](https://developers.google.com/web/tools/chrome-devtools/evaluate-performance/reference ) of your site to help diagnose performance issues.
- Test Chrome Extensions.
2018-01-11 08:28:36 +00:00
<!-- [END usecases] -->
2017-07-11 23:27:45 +00:00
2018-01-11 08:28:36 +00:00
<!-- [START getstarted] -->
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
2017-08-11 01:31:54 +00:00
## Getting Started
2017-07-31 22:15:43 +00:00
2017-08-11 01:31:54 +00:00
### Installation
2017-05-11 07:06:41 +00:00
2017-08-11 01:31:54 +00:00
To use Puppeteer in your project, run:
2018-02-09 03:59:46 +00:00
```bash
2018-04-03 17:26:21 +00:00
npm i puppeteer
2018-01-23 01:11:10 +00:00
# or "yarn add puppeteer"
2017-06-20 02:17:11 +00:00
```
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
When you install Puppeteer, it downloads a recent version of Chromium (~170MB Mac, ~282MB Linux, ~280MB Win) that is guaranteed to work with the API (customizable through [Environment Variables ](#environment-variables )). For a version of Puppeteer purely for connection, see [`puppeteer-core` ](#puppeteer-core ).
2017-06-19 23:37:55 +00:00
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
#### Environment Variables
2018-08-10 02:31:14 +00:00
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
Puppeteer looks for certain [environment variables ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environment_variable ) to aid its operations.
If Puppeteer doesn't find them in the environment during the installation step, a lowercased variant of these variables will be used from the [npm config ](https://docs.npmjs.com/cli/config ).
2018-08-10 02:31:14 +00:00
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
- `HTTP_PROXY` , `HTTPS_PROXY` , `NO_PROXY` - defines HTTP proxy settings that are used to download and run the browser.
- `PUPPETEER_SKIP_CHROMIUM_DOWNLOAD` - do not download bundled Chromium during installation step.
- `PUPPETEER_TMP_DIR` - defines the directory to be used by Puppeteer for creating temporary files. Defaults to [`os.tmpdir()` ](https://nodejs.org/api/os.html#os_os_tmpdir ).
- `PUPPETEER_DOWNLOAD_HOST` - overwrite URL prefix that is used to download Chromium. Note: this includes protocol and might even include path prefix. Defaults to `https://storage.googleapis.com` .
- `PUPPETEER_DOWNLOAD_PATH` - overwrite the path for the downloads folder. Defaults to `<root>/.local-chromium` , where `<root>` is Puppeteer's package root.
- `PUPPETEER_CHROMIUM_REVISION` - specify a certain version of Chromium you'd like Puppeteer to use. See [`puppeteer.launch` ](https://pptr.dev/api/puppeteer.puppeteernode.launch ) on how executable path is inferred.
- `PUPPETEER_EXECUTABLE_PATH` - specify an executable path to be used in [`puppeteer.launch` ](https://pptr.dev/api/puppeteer.puppeteernode.launch ).
- `PUPPETEER_PRODUCT` - specify which browser you'd like Puppeteer to use. Must be one of `chrome` or `firefox` . This can also be used during installation to fetch the recommended browser binary. Setting `product` programmatically in [`puppeteer.launch` ](https://pptr.dev/api/puppeteer.puppeteernode.launch ) supersedes this environment variable. The product is exposed in [`puppeteer.product` ](https://pptr.dev/api/puppeteer.product )
- `PUPPETEER_EXPERIMENTAL_CHROMIUM_MAC_ARM` — specify Puppeteer download Chromium for Apple M1. On Apple M1 devices Puppeteer by default downloads the version for Intel's processor which runs via Rosetta. It works without any problems, however, with this option, you should get more efficient resource usage (CPU and RAM) that could lead to a faster execution time.
:::danger
Puppeteer is only [guaranteed to work ](https://pptr.dev/faq#q-why-doesnt-puppeteer-vxxx-work-with-chromium-vyyy ) with the bundled Chromium, use at your own risk.
:::
:::caution
`PUPPETEER_*` env variables are not accounted for in [`puppeteer-core` ](#puppeteer-core ).
:::
#### puppeteer-core
Every release since v1.7.0 we publish two packages:
- [`puppeteer` ](https://www.npmjs.com/package/puppeteer )
- [`puppeteer-core` ](https://www.npmjs.com/package/puppeteer-core )
`puppeteer` is a _product_ for browser automation. When installed, it downloads a version of
Chromium, which it then drives using `puppeteer-core` . Being an end-user product, `puppeteer` supports a bunch of convenient `PUPPETEER_*` env variables to tweak its behavior.
`puppeteer-core` is a _library_ to help drive anything that supports DevTools protocol. `puppeteer-core` doesn't download Chromium when installed. Being a library, `puppeteer-core` is fully driven
through its programmatic interface and disregards all the `PUPPETEER_*` env variables.
To sum up, the only differences between `puppeteer-core` and `puppeteer` are:
2018-08-10 02:31:14 +00:00
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
- `puppeteer-core` doesn't automatically download Chromium when installed.
- `puppeteer-core` ignores all `PUPPETEER_*` env variables.
2018-08-10 02:31:14 +00:00
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
In most cases, you'll be fine using the `puppeteer` package.
However, you should use `puppeteer-core` if:
- you're building another end-user product or library atop of DevTools protocol. For example, one might build a PDF generator using `puppeteer-core` and write a custom `install.js` script that downloads [`headless_shell` ](https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/lkgr/headless/README.md ) instead of Chromium to save disk space.
- you're bundling Puppeteer to use in Chrome Extension / browser with the DevTools protocol where downloading an additional Chromium binary is unnecessary.
- you're building a set of tools where `puppeteer-core` is one of the ingredients and you want to postpone `install.js` script execution until Chromium is about to be used.
When using `puppeteer-core` , remember to change the _include_ line:
```ts
const puppeteer = require('puppeteer-core');
```
You will then need to call [`puppeteer.connect` ](https://pptr.dev/api/puppeteer.puppeteer.connect ) or [`puppeteer.launch` ](https://pptr.dev/api/puppeteer.puppeteernode.launch ) with an explicit `executablePath` or `channel` option.
2018-09-04 16:32:57 +00:00
2017-08-11 01:31:54 +00:00
### Usage
2017-06-19 23:37:55 +00:00
2019-10-16 15:00:20 +00:00
Puppeteer follows the latest [maintenance LTS ](https://github.com/nodejs/Release#release-schedule ) version of Node.
2017-08-20 19:43:15 +00:00
Puppeteer will be familiar to people using other browser testing frameworks. You create an instance
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
of `Browser` , open pages, and then manipulate them with [Puppeteer's API ](https://pptr.dev/api ).
2017-05-11 07:06:41 +00:00
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
**Example** - navigating to https://example.com and saving a screenshot as _example.png_ :
2017-05-11 07:06:41 +00:00
2018-03-07 05:50:06 +00:00
Save file as **example.js**
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
```ts
2017-08-15 01:08:06 +00:00
const puppeteer = require('puppeteer');
2017-06-19 23:37:55 +00:00
2017-08-18 02:54:51 +00:00
(async () => {
const browser = await puppeteer.launch();
const page = await browser.newPage();
await page.goto('https://example.com');
2022-06-22 13:25:44 +00:00
await page.screenshot({path: 'example.png'});
2017-08-11 01:31:54 +00:00
2017-09-16 04:27:14 +00:00
await browser.close();
2017-08-11 01:31:54 +00:00
})();
```
2018-03-07 05:50:06 +00:00
Execute script on the command line
```bash
node example.js
```
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
Puppeteer sets an initial page size to 800× `Page.setViewport()` ](https://pptr.dev/api/puppeteer.page.setviewport ).
2017-08-11 01:31:54 +00:00
**Example** - create a PDF.
2018-03-07 05:50:06 +00:00
Save file as **hn.js**
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
```ts
2017-08-15 01:08:06 +00:00
const puppeteer = require('puppeteer');
2017-08-11 01:31:54 +00:00
2017-08-18 02:54:51 +00:00
(async () => {
const browser = await puppeteer.launch();
const page = await browser.newPage();
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
await page.goto('https://news.ycombinator.com', {
waitUntil: 'networkidle2',
});
2022-06-22 13:25:44 +00:00
await page.pdf({path: 'hn.pdf', format: 'a4'});
2017-08-11 01:31:54 +00:00
2017-09-16 04:27:14 +00:00
await browser.close();
2017-08-11 01:31:54 +00:00
})();
```
2018-03-07 05:50:06 +00:00
Execute script on the command line
```bash
node hn.js
```
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
See [`Page.pdf` ](https://pptr.dev/api/puppeteer.page.pdf ) for more information about creating pdfs.
2017-08-11 01:31:54 +00:00
2017-08-24 16:13:49 +00:00
**Example** - evaluate script in the context of the page
2018-03-07 05:50:06 +00:00
Save file as **get-dimensions.js**
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
```ts
2017-08-24 16:13:49 +00:00
const puppeteer = require('puppeteer');
(async () => {
const browser = await puppeteer.launch();
const page = await browser.newPage();
await page.goto('https://example.com');
2017-08-30 22:41:45 +00:00
2017-08-24 16:13:49 +00:00
// Get the "viewport" of the page, as reported by the page.
const dimensions = await page.evaluate(() => {
return {
width: document.documentElement.clientWidth,
height: document.documentElement.clientHeight,
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
deviceScaleFactor: window.devicePixelRatio,
2017-08-24 16:13:49 +00:00
};
});
2017-08-30 22:41:45 +00:00
2017-08-24 16:13:49 +00:00
console.log('Dimensions:', dimensions);
2017-09-16 04:27:14 +00:00
await browser.close();
2017-08-24 16:13:49 +00:00
})();
2017-08-24 16:52:56 +00:00
```
2017-08-24 16:13:49 +00:00
2018-03-07 05:50:06 +00:00
Execute script on the command line
```bash
node get-dimensions.js
```
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
See [`Page.evaluate` ](https://pptr.dev/api/puppeteer.page.evaluate ) and related methods like [`Page.evaluateOnNewDocument` ](https://pptr.dev/api/puppeteer.page.evaluateOnNewDocument ) and [`Page.exposeFunction` ](https://pptr.dev/api/puppeteer.page.exposeFunction ).
2017-08-24 16:13:49 +00:00
2018-01-11 08:28:36 +00:00
<!-- [END getstarted] -->
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
### Working with Chrome Extensions
Puppeteer can be used for testing Chrome Extensions.
:::caution
Extensions in Chrome / Chromium currently only work in non-headless mode and experimental Chrome headless mode.
:::
The following is code for getting a handle to the [background page ](https://developer.chrome.com/extensions/background_pages ) of an extension whose source is located in `./my-extension` :
```ts
const puppeteer = require('puppeteer');
(async () => {
const pathToExtension = require('path').join(__dirname, 'my-extension');
const browser = await puppeteer.launch({
headless: 'chrome',
args: [
`--disable-extensions-except=${pathToExtension}` ,
`--load-extension=${pathToExtension}` ,
],
});
const backgroundPageTarget = await browser.waitForTarget(
target => target.type() === 'background_page'
);
const backgroundPage = await backgroundPageTarget.page();
// Test the background page as you would any other page.
await browser.close();
})();
```
:::note
Chrome Manifest V3 extensions have a background ServiceWorker of type 'service_worker', instead of a page of type 'background_page'.
:::
:::note
It is not yet possible to test extension popups or content scripts.
:::
2018-01-11 08:28:36 +00:00
<!-- [START runtimesettings] -->
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
2017-08-11 01:31:54 +00:00
## Default runtime settings
2017-08-15 00:55:40 +00:00
**1. Uses Headless mode**
2017-08-11 01:31:54 +00:00
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
Puppeteer launches Chromium in [headless mode ](https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2017/04/headless-chrome ). To launch a full version of Chromium, set the [`headless` option ](https://pptr.dev/api/puppeteer.browserlaunchargumentoptions.headless ) when launching a browser:
2017-08-11 01:31:54 +00:00
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
```ts
2022-06-22 13:25:44 +00:00
const browser = await puppeteer.launch({headless: false}); // default is true
2017-08-11 01:31:54 +00:00
```
2017-08-15 00:55:40 +00:00
**2. Runs a bundled version of Chromium**
2017-06-20 02:17:11 +00:00
2017-08-15 00:55:40 +00:00
By default, Puppeteer downloads and uses a specific version of Chromium so its API
2017-12-15 03:09:48 +00:00
is guaranteed to work out of the box. To use Puppeteer with a different version of Chrome or Chromium,
2017-08-15 00:55:40 +00:00
pass in the executable's path when creating a `Browser` instance:
2017-08-11 01:31:54 +00:00
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
```ts
2022-06-22 13:25:44 +00:00
const browser = await puppeteer.launch({executablePath: '/path/to/Chrome'});
2017-08-15 00:55:40 +00:00
```
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
You can also use Puppeteer with Firefox Nightly (experimental support). See [`Puppeteer.launch` ](https://pptr.dev/api/puppeteer.puppeteernode.launch ) for more information.
2017-08-15 00:55:40 +00:00
2021-09-14 15:02:39 +00:00
See [`this article` ](https://www.howtogeek.com/202825/what%E2%80%99s-the-difference-between-chromium-and-chrome/ ) for a description of the differences between Chromium and Chrome. [`This article` ](https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/refs/heads/main/docs/chromium_browser_vs_google_chrome.md ) describes some differences for Linux users.
2017-12-15 03:09:48 +00:00
2017-08-15 00:55:40 +00:00
**3. Creates a fresh user profile**
2017-08-11 01:31:54 +00:00
2020-03-10 20:59:03 +00:00
Puppeteer creates its own browser user profile which it **cleans up on every run** .
2017-06-20 02:17:11 +00:00
2018-01-11 08:28:36 +00:00
<!-- [END runtimesettings] -->
2018-08-10 08:34:45 +00:00
## Resources
2017-06-20 02:17:11 +00:00
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
- [API Documentation ](https://pptr.dev/api )
- [Examples ](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/tree/main/examples )
2018-08-10 08:34:45 +00:00
- [Community list of Puppeteer resources ](https://github.com/transitive-bullshit/awesome-puppeteer )
2017-05-11 07:06:41 +00:00
2018-01-11 08:28:36 +00:00
<!-- [START debugging] -->
2017-08-18 18:03:35 +00:00
## Debugging tips
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
1. Turn off headless mode - sometimes it's useful to see what the browser is
displaying. Instead of launching in headless mode, launch a full version of
the browser using `headless: false` :
2017-08-18 18:03:35 +00:00
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
```ts
2022-06-22 13:25:44 +00:00
const browser = await puppeteer.launch({headless: false});
2020-05-05 05:45:21 +00:00
```
2017-08-18 18:03:35 +00:00
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
2. Slow it down - the `slowMo` option slows down Puppeteer operations by the
specified amount of milliseconds. It's another way to help see what's going on.
2017-08-18 18:03:35 +00:00
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
```ts
2020-05-05 05:45:21 +00:00
const browser = await puppeteer.launch({
headless: false,
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
slowMo: 250, // slow down by 250ms
2020-05-05 05:45:21 +00:00
});
```
2017-08-18 18:03:35 +00:00
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
3. Capture console output - You can listen for the `console` event.
This is also handy when debugging code in `page.evaluate()` :
2017-08-23 03:17:09 +00:00
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
```ts
2022-06-22 13:25:44 +00:00
page.on('console', msg => console.log('PAGE LOG:', msg.text()));
2018-02-09 03:59:46 +00:00
2020-05-05 05:45:21 +00:00
await page.evaluate(() => console.log(`url is ${location.href}`));
```
2017-08-23 03:17:09 +00:00
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
4. Use debugger in application code browser
2018-04-30 18:01:35 +00:00
2019-05-10 01:00:32 +00:00
There are two execution context: node.js that is running test code, and the browser
running application code being tested. This lets you debug code in the
application code browser; ie code inside `evaluate()` .
2018-04-30 18:01:35 +00:00
2019-05-10 01:00:32 +00:00
- Use `{devtools: true}` when launching Puppeteer:
2018-04-30 18:01:35 +00:00
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
```ts
2022-06-22 13:25:44 +00:00
const browser = await puppeteer.launch({devtools: true});
2020-05-05 05:45:21 +00:00
```
2018-07-19 02:33:51 +00:00
2019-05-10 01:00:32 +00:00
- Change default test timeout:
2018-07-19 02:33:51 +00:00
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
jest: `jest.setTimeout(100000);`
2018-07-19 02:33:51 +00:00
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
jasmine: `jasmine.DEFAULT_TIMEOUT_INTERVAL = 100000;`
2018-07-19 02:33:51 +00:00
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
mocha: `this.timeout(100000);` (don't forget to change test to use [function and not '=>' ](https://stackoverflow.com/a/23492442 ))
2018-04-30 18:01:35 +00:00
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
- Add an evaluate statement with `debugger` inside / add `debugger` to an existing evaluate statement:
2018-04-30 18:01:35 +00:00
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
```ts
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
await page.evaluate(() => {
debugger;
});
2020-05-05 05:45:21 +00:00
```
2018-04-30 18:01:35 +00:00
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
The test will now stop executing in the above evaluate statement, and chromium will stop in debug mode.
2019-05-10 01:00:32 +00:00
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
5. Use debugger in node.js
2019-05-10 01:00:32 +00:00
This will let you debug test code. For example, you can step over `await page.click()` in the node.js script and see the click happen in the application code browser.
Note that you won't be able to run `await page.click()` in
DevTools console due to this [Chromium bug ](https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=833928 ). So if
you want to try something out, you have to add it to your test file.
- Add `debugger;` to your test, eg:
2020-05-05 05:45:21 +00:00
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
```ts
2019-05-10 01:00:32 +00:00
debugger;
await page.click('a[target=_blank]');
```
2020-05-05 05:45:21 +00:00
2019-05-10 01:00:32 +00:00
- Set `headless` to `false`
- Run `node --inspect-brk` , eg `node --inspect-brk node_modules/.bin/jest tests`
- In Chrome open `chrome://inspect/#devices` and click `inspect`
- In the newly opened test browser, type `F8` to resume test execution
- Now your `debugger` will be hit and you can debug in the test browser
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
6. Enable verbose logging - internal DevTools protocol traffic
will be logged via the [`debug` ](https://github.com/visionmedia/debug ) module under the `puppeteer` namespace.
2019-05-10 01:00:32 +00:00
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
# Basic verbose logging
env DEBUG="puppeteer:*" node script.js
2017-08-30 22:41:45 +00:00
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
# Protocol traffic can be rather noisy. This example filters out all Network domain messages
env DEBUG="puppeteer:*" env DEBUG_COLORS=true node script.js 2>& 1 | grep -v '"Network'
2017-08-30 22:41:45 +00:00
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
7. Debug your Puppeteer (node) code easily, using [ndb ](https://github.com/GoogleChromeLabs/ndb )
2018-10-04 21:23:03 +00:00
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
- `npm install -g ndb` (or even better, use [npx ](https://github.com/zkat/npx )!)
2018-09-08 10:54:09 +00:00
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
- add a `debugger` to your Puppeteer (node) code
2018-09-08 10:54:09 +00:00
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
- add `ndb` (or `npx ndb` ) before your test command. For example:
2018-09-08 10:54:09 +00:00
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
`ndb jest` or `ndb mocha` (or `npx ndb jest` / `npx ndb mocha` )
2018-09-08 10:54:09 +00:00
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
- debug your test inside chromium like a boss!
2018-09-08 10:54:09 +00:00
2018-01-11 08:28:36 +00:00
<!-- [END debugging] -->
2017-08-30 22:41:45 +00:00
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
## Contributing
fix: much better TypeScript definitions (#6837)
This PR aims to vastly improve our TS types and how we ship them.
Our previous attempt at shipping TypeScript was unfortunately flawed for
many reasons when compared to the @types/puppeteer package:
* It only worked if you needed the default export. If you wanted to
import a type that Puppeteer uses, you'd have to do `import type X
from 'puppeteer/lib/...'`. This is not something we want to encourage
because that means our internal file structure becomes almost public
API.
* It gave absolutely no help to CommonJS users in JS files because it
would warn people they needed to do `const pptr =
require('puppeteer').default, which is not correct.
* I found a bug in the `evaluate` types which mean't you couldn't
override the types to provide more info, and TS would insist the types
were all `unknown`.
The goal of this PR is to support:
1. In a `ts` file, `import puppeteer from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, `import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'`
1. In a `ts` file, referencing a type as `puppeteer.ElementHandle`
1. In a `ts` file, you can get good type inference when running
`foo.evaluate(x => x.clientHeight)`.
1. In a `js` file using CJS, you can do `const puppeteer =
require('puppeteer')` and get good type help from VSCode.
To test this I created a new empty repository with two test files in,
one `.ts` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/22ba2f390f97c7312cd70025a2096fc8,
and a `js` file with this in:
https://gist.github.com/jackfranklin/06bed136fdb22419cb7a8a9a4d4ef32f.
These files included enough code to check that the types were behaving
as I expected.
The fix for our types was to make use of API Extractor, which we already
use for our docs, to "rollup" all the disparate type files that TS
generates into one large `types.d.ts` which contains all the various
types that we define, such as:
```ts
export declare class ElementHandle {...}
export type EvaluateFn ...
```
If we then update our `package.json` `types` field to point to that file
in `lib/types.d.ts`, this then allows a developer to write:
```
import type {ElementHandle} from 'puppeteer'
```
And get the correct type definitions. However, what the `types.d.ts`
file doesn't do out of the box is declare the default export, so
importing Puppeteer's default export to call a method such as `launch`
on it will get you an error.
That's where the `script/add-default-export-to-types.ts` comes in. It
appends the following to the auto-generated `types.d.ts` file:
```ts
declare const puppeteer: PuppeteerNode;
export = puppeteer;
```
This tells TypeScript what the default export is, and by using the
`export =` syntax, we make sure TS understands both in a TS ESM
environment and in a JS CJS environment.
Now the `build` step, which is run by GitHub Actions when we release,
will generate the `.d.ts` file and then extend it with the default
export code.
To ensure that I was generating a valid package, I created a new
repository locally with the two code samples linked in Gists above. I
then ran:
```
npm init -y
npm install --save-dev typescript
npx tsc --init
```
Which gives me a base to test from. In Puppeteer, I ran `npm pack`,
which packs the module into a tar that's almost identical to what would
be published, so I can be confident that the .d.ts files in there are
what would be published.
I then installed it:
```
npm install --save-dev ../../puppeteer/puppeteer-7.0.1-post.tgz
```
And then reloaded VSCode in my dummy project. By deliberately making
typos and hovering over the code, I could confirm that all the goals
listed above were met, and this seems like a vast improvement on our
types.
2021-02-09 08:00:42 +00:00
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
Check out our [contributing guide ](https://pptr.dev/contributing ) to get an overview of Puppeteer development.
2018-04-17 17:57:21 +00:00
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
## FAQ
2018-04-17 17:57:21 +00:00
2022-07-01 11:52:39 +00:00
Our [FAQ ](https://pptr.dev/faq ) has migrated to [our site ](https://pptr.dev/faq ).
