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
2021-02-02 10:03:31 +00:00
[](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/actions?query=workflow%3Arun-checks) [](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
2017-08-18 17:21:37 +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
2022-06-07 14:34:36 +00:00
###### [API](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/blob/main/docs/api.md) | [FAQ](#faq) | [Contributing](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md) | [Troubleshooting](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/blob/main/docs/troubleshooting.md)
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
2017-08-11 01:31:54 +00:00
###### What can I do?
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
```
2022-06-07 14:34:36 +00:00
Note: 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. To skip the download, download into another path, or download a different browser, see [Environment variables ](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/blob/main/docs/api.md#environment-variables ).
2017-06-19 23:37:55 +00:00
2018-08-10 02:31:14 +00:00
### puppeteer-core
Since version 1.7.0 we publish the [`puppeteer-core` ](https://www.npmjs.com/package/puppeteer-core ) package,
2020-03-10 20:59:03 +00:00
a version of Puppeteer that doesn't download any browser by default.
2018-08-10 02:31:14 +00:00
```bash
npm i puppeteer-core
2018-09-11 11:19:13 +00:00
# or "yarn add puppeteer-core"
2018-08-10 02:31:14 +00:00
```
2022-04-08 09:58:55 +00:00
`puppeteer-core` is intended to be a lightweight version of Puppeteer for launching an existing browser installation or for connecting to a remote one. Be sure that the version of puppeteer-core you install is compatible with the browser you intend to connect to.
2018-08-10 02:31:14 +00:00
2022-06-07 14:34:36 +00:00
See [puppeteer vs puppeteer-core ](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/blob/main/docs/api.md#puppeteer-vs-puppeteer-core ).
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.
2020-03-10 20:55:32 +00:00
Note: Prior to v1.18.1, Puppeteer required at least Node v6.4.0. Versions from v1.18.1 to v2.1.0 rely on
Node 8.9.0+. Starting from v3.0.0 Puppeteer starts to rely on Node 10.18.1+. All examples below use async/await which is only supported in Node v7.6.0 or greater.
2018-01-11 08:28:36 +00:00
2017-08-20 19:43:15 +00:00
Puppeteer will be familiar to people using other browser testing frameworks. You create an instance
2022-06-07 14:34:36 +00:00
of `Browser` , open pages, and then manipulate them with [Puppeteer's API ](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/blob/main/docs/api.md# ).
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**
2017-07-28 02:15:30 +00:00
```js
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');
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.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
```
2022-06-07 14:34:36 +00:00
Puppeteer sets an initial page size to 800× `Page.setViewport()` ](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/blob/main/docs/api.md#pagesetviewportviewport ).
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**
2017-08-11 01:31:54 +00:00
```js
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',
});
2021-02-18 08:05:43 +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
```
2022-06-07 14:34:36 +00:00
See [`Page.pdf()` ](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/blob/main/docs/api.md#pagepdfoptions ) 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**
2017-08-24 16:13:49 +00:00
```js
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
```
2022-06-07 14:34:36 +00:00
See [`Page.evaluate()` ](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/blob/main/docs/api.md#pageevaluatepagefunction-args ) for more information on `evaluate` and related methods like `evaluateOnNewDocument` and `exposeFunction` .
2017-08-24 16:13:49 +00:00
2018-01-11 08:28:36 +00:00
<!-- [END getstarted] -->
<!-- [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
2022-06-07 14:34:36 +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://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/blob/main/docs/api.md#puppeteerlaunchoptions ) when launching a browser:
2017-08-11 01:31:54 +00:00
```js
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
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
2017-08-15 00:55:40 +00:00
```js
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
const browser = await puppeteer.launch({ executablePath: '/path/to/Chrome' });
2017-08-15 00:55:40 +00:00
```
2022-06-07 14:34:36 +00:00
You can also use Puppeteer with Firefox Nightly (experimental support). See [`Puppeteer.launch()` ](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/blob/main/docs/api.md#puppeteerlaunchoptions ) 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
2022-06-07 14:34:36 +00:00
- [API Documentation ](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/blob/main/docs/api.md )
2020-06-15 15:34:16 +00:00
- [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
2020-05-05 05:45:21 +00:00
```js
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
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
2020-05-05 05:45:21 +00:00
```js
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
2020-05-05 05:45:21 +00:00
```js
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
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
2020-05-05 05:45:21 +00:00
```js
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
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
2020-05-05 05:45:21 +00:00
```js
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
```js
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
2020-06-25 12:38:01 +00:00
<!-- [START typescript] -->
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
2020-06-25 12:38:01 +00:00
## Usage with TypeScript
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
We have recently completed a migration to move the Puppeteer source code from JavaScript to TypeScript and as of version 7.0.1 we ship our own built-in type definitions.
2020-06-25 12:38:01 +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
If you are on a version older than 7, we recommend installing the Puppeteer type definitions from the [DefinitelyTyped ](https://definitelytyped.org/ ) repository:
2020-06-25 12:38:01 +00:00
```bash
npm install --save-dev @types/puppeteer
```
The types that you'll see appearing in the Puppeteer source code are based off the great work of those who have contributed to the `@types/puppeteer` package. We really appreciate the hard work those people put in to providing high quality TypeScript definitions for Puppeteer's users.
<!-- [END typescript] -->
2017-07-27 18:28:35 +00:00
## Contributing to Puppeteer
2017-05-11 07:06:41 +00:00
2020-06-15 15:34:16 +00:00
Check out [contributing guide ](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md ) to get an overview of Puppeteer development.
2017-05-11 07:06:41 +00:00
2018-01-11 08:28:36 +00:00
<!-- [START faq] -->
2017-06-19 23:37:55 +00:00
# FAQ
2017-05-11 07:06:41 +00:00
2017-08-15 00:55:40 +00:00
#### Q: Who maintains Puppeteer?
The Chrome DevTools team maintains the library, but we'd love your help and expertise on the project!
2020-06-15 15:34:16 +00:00
See [Contributing ](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md ).
2017-08-15 00:55:40 +00:00
2020-01-29 14:52:20 +00:00
#### Q: What is the status of cross-browser support?
2020-04-15 14:46:01 +00:00
Official Firefox support is currently experimental. The ongoing collaboration with Mozilla aims to support common end-to-end testing use cases, for which developers expect cross-browser coverage. The Puppeteer team needs input from users to stabilize Firefox support and to bring missing APIs to our attention.
2020-01-29 14:52:20 +00:00
2022-06-07 14:34:36 +00:00
From Puppeteer v2.1.0 onwards you can specify [`puppeteer.launch({product: 'firefox'})` ](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/blob/main/docs/api.md#puppeteerlaunchoptions ) to run your Puppeteer scripts in Firefox Nightly, without any additional custom patches. While [an older experiment ](https://www.npmjs.com/package/puppeteer-firefox ) required a patched version of Firefox, [the current approach ](https://wiki.mozilla.org/Remote ) works with “stock” Firefox.
2020-01-29 14:52:20 +00:00
2020-04-15 14:46:01 +00:00
We will continue to collaborate with other browser vendors to bring Puppeteer support to browsers such as Safari.
This effort includes exploration of a standard for executing cross-browser commands (instead of relying on the non-standard DevTools Protocol used by Chrome).
2020-01-29 14:52:20 +00:00
2018-07-05 06:13:26 +00:00
#### Q: What are Puppeteer’
2017-08-15 00:55:40 +00:00
2018-07-05 06:13:26 +00:00
The goals of the project are:
2017-08-15 00:55:40 +00:00
2017-08-15 16:02:28 +00:00
- Provide a slim, canonical library that highlights the capabilities of the [DevTools Protocol ](https://chromedevtools.github.io/devtools-protocol/ ).
2018-02-09 03:59:46 +00:00
- Provide a reference implementation for similar testing libraries. Eventually, these other frameworks could adopt Puppeteer as their foundational layer.
2017-08-15 00:55:40 +00:00
- Grow the adoption of headless/automated browser testing.
- Help dogfood new DevTools Protocol features...and catch bugs!
- Learn more about the pain points of automated browser testing and help fill those gaps.
2017-08-16 01:08:19 +00:00
2018-07-05 06:13:26 +00:00
We adapt [Chromium principles ](https://www.chromium.org/developers/core-principles ) to help us drive product decisions:
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
2018-07-05 06:13:26 +00:00
- **Speed**: Puppeteer has almost zero performance overhead over an automated page.
- **Security**: Puppeteer operates off-process with respect to Chromium, making it safe to automate potentially malicious pages.
- **Stability**: Puppeteer should not be flaky and should not leak memory.
- **Simplicity**: Puppeteer provides a high-level API that’
#### Q: Is Puppeteer replacing Selenium/WebDriver?
**No**. Both projects are valuable for very different reasons:
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
2018-07-05 06:13:26 +00:00
- Selenium/WebDriver focuses on cross-browser automation; its value proposition is a single standard API that works across all major browsers.
- Puppeteer focuses on Chromium; its value proposition is richer functionality and higher reliability.
That said, you **can** use Puppeteer to run tests against Chromium, e.g. using the community-driven [jest-puppeteer ](https://github.com/smooth-code/jest-puppeteer ). While this probably shouldn’
2019-11-26 12:12:25 +00:00
- Puppeteer requires zero setup and comes bundled with the Chromium version it works best with, making it [very easy to start with ](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/#getting-started ). At the end of the day, it’
2018-07-05 06:13:26 +00:00
- Puppeteer has event-driven architecture, which removes a lot of potential flakiness. There’
- Puppeteer runs headless by default, which makes it fast to run. Puppeteer v1.5.0 also exposes browser contexts, making it possible to efficiently parallelize test execution.
- Puppeteer shines when it comes to debugging: flip the “headless” bit to false, add “slowMo”, and you’
#### Q: Why doesn’
We see Puppeteer as an **indivisible entity** with Chromium. Each version of Puppeteer bundles a specific version of Chromium – **the only** version it is guaranteed to work with.
2017-08-18 18:03:35 +00:00
2018-07-05 06:13:26 +00:00
This is not an artificial constraint: A lot of work on Puppeteer is actually taking place in the Chromium repository. Here’
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
2019-11-26 12:12:25 +00:00
- A Puppeteer bug is reported: https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/issues/2709
2018-07-19 02:33:51 +00:00
- It turned out this is an issue with the DevTools protocol, so we’
2019-11-26 12:12:25 +00:00
- Once the upstream fix is landed, we roll updated Chromium into Puppeteer: https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/pull/2769
2017-08-16 01:08:19 +00:00
2019-01-11 05:42:24 +00:00
However, oftentimes it is desirable to use Puppeteer with the official Google Chrome rather than Chromium. For this to work, you should install a `puppeteer-core` version that corresponds to the Chrome version.
For example, in order to drive Chrome 71 with puppeteer-core, use `chrome-71` npm tag:
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
2019-01-11 05:42:24 +00:00
```bash
npm install puppeteer-core@chrome-71
```
2018-07-05 06:13:26 +00:00
#### Q: Which Chromium version does Puppeteer use?
2022-02-14 13:06:18 +00:00
Find the version using one of the following ways:
- Look for the `chromium` entry in [revisions.ts ](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/blob/main/src/revisions.ts ). To find the corresponding Chromium commit and version number, search for the revision prefixed by an `r` in [OmahaProxy ](https://omahaproxy.appspot.com/ )'s "Find Releases" section.
- Look for the `versionsPerRelease` map in [versions.js ](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/blob/main/versions.js ) which contains mapping between Chromium and Puppeteer versions. Note: The file contains only Puppeteer versions where Chromium is updated. Not all Puppeteer versions are listed.
2018-07-05 06:13:26 +00:00
2020-03-10 20:59:03 +00:00
#### Q: Which Firefox version does Puppeteer use?
2020-06-29 15:13:24 +00:00
Since Firefox support is experimental, Puppeteer downloads the latest [Firefox Nightly ](https://wiki.mozilla.org/Nightly ) when the `PUPPETEER_PRODUCT` environment variable is set to `firefox` . That's also why the value of `firefox` in [revisions.ts ](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/blob/main/src/revisions.ts ) is `latest` -- Puppeteer isn't tied to a particular Firefox version.
2020-03-10 20:59:03 +00:00
To fetch Firefox Nightly as part of Puppeteer installation:
```bash
PUPPETEER_PRODUCT=firefox npm i puppeteer
# or "yarn add puppeteer"
```
2018-07-05 06:13:26 +00:00
#### Q: What’
From Puppeteer’ ** “navigation” is anything that changes a page’
Aside from regular navigation where the browser hits the network to fetch a new document from the web server, this includes [anchor navigations ](https://www.w3.org/TR/html5/single-page.html#scroll-to-fragid ) and [History API ](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/History_API ) usage.
With this definition of “navigation,” **Puppeteer works seamlessly with single-page applications.**
#### Q: What’
In browsers, input events could be divided into two big groups: trusted vs. untrusted.
- **Trusted events**: events generated by users interacting with the page, e.g. using a mouse or keyboard.
- **Untrusted event**: events generated by Web APIs, e.g. `document.createEvent` or `element.click()` methods.
Websites can distinguish between these two groups:
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
2018-07-05 06:13:26 +00:00
- using an [`Event.isTrusted` ](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Event/isTrusted ) event flag
- sniffing for accompanying events. For example, every trusted `'click'` event is preceded by `'mousedown'` and `'mouseup'` events.
For automation purposes it’ **All input events generated with Puppeteer are trusted and fire proper accompanying events.** If, for some reason, one needs an untrusted event, it’ `page.evaluate` and generate a fake event:
```js
await page.evaluate(() => {
document.querySelector('button[type=submit]').click();
});
```
2018-01-08 23:01:17 +00:00
#### Q: What features does Puppeteer not support?
2019-11-26 12:12:25 +00:00
You may find that Puppeteer does not behave as expected when controlling pages that incorporate audio and video. (For example, [video playback/screenshots is likely to fail ](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/issues/291 ).) There are two reasons for this:
2018-01-08 23:01:17 +00:00
2022-06-07 14:34:36 +00:00
- Puppeteer is bundled with Chromium — not Chrome — and so by default, it inherits all of [Chromium's media-related limitations ](https://www.chromium.org/audio-video ). This means that Puppeteer does not support licensed formats such as AAC or H.264. (However, it is possible to force Puppeteer to use a separately-installed version Chrome instead of Chromium via the [`executablePath` option to `puppeteer.launch` ](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/blob/main/docs/api.md#puppeteerlaunchoptions ). You should only use this configuration if you need an official release of Chrome that supports these media formats.)
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
- Since Puppeteer (in all configurations) controls a desktop version of Chromium/Chrome, features that are only supported by the mobile version of Chrome are not supported. This means that Puppeteer [does not support HTTP Live Streaming (HLS) ](https://caniuse.com/#feat=http-live-streaming ).
2018-01-11 08:28:36 +00:00
2019-05-18 09:49:23 +00:00
#### Q: I am having trouble installing / running Puppeteer in my test environment. Where should I look for help?
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
2020-06-15 15:34:16 +00:00
We have a [troubleshooting ](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/blob/main/docs/troubleshooting.md ) guide for various operating systems that lists the required dependencies.
2018-02-06 00:03:07 +00:00
2021-06-21 05:21:05 +00:00
#### Q: Chromium gets downloaded on every `npm ci` run. How can I cache the download?
2021-10-25 09:31:27 +00:00
The default download path is `node_modules/puppeteer/.local-chromium` . However, you can change that path with the `PUPPETEER_DOWNLOAD_PATH` environment variable.
2021-06-21 05:21:05 +00:00
Puppeteer uses that variable to resolve the Chromium executable location during launch, so you don’ `PUPPETEER_EXECUTABLE_PATH` as well.
For example, if you wish to keep the Chromium download in `~/.npm/chromium` :
```sh
export PUPPETEER_DOWNLOAD_PATH=~/.npm/chromium
npm ci
# by default the Chromium executable path is inferred
# from the download path
npm test
# a new run of npm ci will check for the existence of
# Chromium in ~/.npm/chromium
npm ci
```
2018-04-17 17:57:21 +00:00
#### Q: I have more questions! Where do I ask?
There are many ways to get help on 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
2019-11-26 12:12:25 +00:00
- [bugtracker ](https://github.com/puppeteer/puppeteer/issues )
2019-06-15 05:12:24 +00:00
- [Stack Overflow ](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/tagged/puppeteer )
2018-04-17 17:57:21 +00:00
Make sure to search these channels before posting your question.
2018-01-11 08:28:36 +00:00
<!-- [END faq] -->
