// ---------------------------------------------------------- | |
// If you're not in IE (or IE version is less than 5) then: | |
// ie === undefined | |
// If you're in IE (>5) then you can determine which version: | |
// ie === 7; // IE7 | |
// Thus, to detect IE: | |
// if (ie) {} | |
// And to detect the version: | |
// ie && ie === 6 // IE6 | |
// ie && ie > 7 // IE8, IE9 ... | |
// ie && ie < 9 // Anything less than IE9 | |
// ---------------------------------------------------------- | |
var ie = (function(){ | |
var undef, v = 4, div = document.createElement('div'); | |
while ( | |
div.innerHTML = '<!--[if gt IE '+(++v)+']><i></i><![endif]-->', | |
div.getElementsByTagName('i')[0] | |
); | |
return v > 4 ? v : undef; | |
}()); |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
jdalton
commented
Aug 16, 2010
This is hawt. I love the way you use the expression in the |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
paulirish
commented
Aug 16, 2010
hawt +1 |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
miketaylr
Aug 16, 2010
This would be even awesomer with some in-line notes explaining the magic. :) Nice work!
miketaylr
commented
Aug 16, 2010
This would be even awesomer with some in-line notes explaining the magic. :) Nice work! |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
zachleat
Aug 16, 2010
Pretty sweet, especially useful since I've seen some user agents where it has two different IE versions listed. http://www.zachleat.com/web/2008/10/19/jquery-bug-ie-reports-incorrect-browserversion/
zachleat
commented
Aug 16, 2010
Pretty sweet, especially useful since I've seen some user agents where it has two different IE versions listed. http://www.zachleat.com/web/2008/10/19/jquery-bug-ie-reports-incorrect-browserversion/ |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
jdalton
Aug 17, 2010
A bit smaller and returns false
instead of undefined
for non IE browsers:
var ie = (function() {
var v = 3, div = document.createElement('div'), a = div.all || [];
while (div.innerHTML = '<!--[if gt IE '+(++v)+']><br><![endif]-->', a[0]);
return v > 4 ? v : !v;
}());
jdalton
commented
Aug 17, 2010
A bit smaller and returns
|
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
aheckmann
commented
Aug 17, 2010
neato |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
paulirish
Aug 17, 2010
@zach: Ben Alman, Resig and I revised the UA sniffing for jQuery 1.4 in January so the issue from your post has since been resolved.
I'll take a crack at documenting James' original:
var ie = (function(){
var undef, v = 3, div = document.createElement('div');
// the while loop is used without an associated block: {}
// so, only the condition within the () is executed.
// semicolons arent allowed within the condition,
// so a comma is used to stand in for one
// basically allowing the two separate statements
// to be evaluated sequentially.
while (
div.innerHTML = '<!--[if gt IE '+(++v)+']><i></i><![endif]-->',
div.getElementsByTagName('i')[0]
);
// each time it's evaluated, v gets incremented and
// tossed into the DOM as a conditional comment
// the i element is then a child of the div.
// the return value of the getEBTN call is used as
// the final condition expression
// if there is an i element (the IE conditional
// succeeded), then getEBTN's return is truthy
// and the loop continues until there is no
// more i elements.
// In other words: ** MAGIC**
return v > 4 ? v : undef;
}());
paulirish
commented
Aug 17, 2010
@zach: Ben Alman, Resig and I revised the UA sniffing for jQuery 1.4 in January so the issue from your post has since been resolved. I'll take a crack at documenting James' original: var ie = (function(){
var undef, v = 3, div = document.createElement('div');
// the while loop is used without an associated block: {}
// so, only the condition within the () is executed.
// semicolons arent allowed within the condition,
// so a comma is used to stand in for one
// basically allowing the two separate statements
// to be evaluated sequentially.
while (
div.innerHTML = '<!--[if gt IE '+(++v)+']><i></i><![endif]-->',
div.getElementsByTagName('i')[0]
);
// each time it's evaluated, v gets incremented and
// tossed into the DOM as a conditional comment
// the i element is then a child of the div.
// the return value of the getEBTN call is used as
// the final condition expression
// if there is an i element (the IE conditional
// succeeded), then getEBTN's return is truthy
// and the loop continues until there is no
// more i elements.
// In other words: ** MAGIC**
return v > 4 ? v : undef;
}()); |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
zachleat
Aug 17, 2010
Yeah, the jQuery team was very quick to patch it up, just offering as evidence that UA strings can be corrupted.
zachleat
commented
Aug 17, 2010
Yeah, the jQuery team was very quick to patch it up, just offering as evidence that UA strings can be corrupted. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
wavded
commented
Aug 17, 2010
+1 on the hawtness |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
dperini
Aug 17, 2010
Cool !
The "&&" operator could be used instead of the comma as another variation to continue the expression in the while.
But yes the comma is one byte less ;-)
dperini
commented
Aug 17, 2010
Cool ! |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
miketaylr
commented
Aug 17, 2010
Nice comments Paul! |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
phiggins42
Aug 17, 2010
this is hawt. My first inclination was to replace the d.isIE sniff for this, but have to consider CLA. bummer.
phiggins42
commented
Aug 17, 2010
this is hawt. My first inclination was to replace the d.isIE sniff for this, but have to consider CLA. bummer. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
jdalton
Aug 17, 2010
To compliment Paul's explanation I will get a bit more specy.
Paul is mixing up the terms Statement
and Expression
in his explanation of the while statement.
A while statement is made of the following parts
while ( Expression ) Statement
In James' example
while(a.prop=c, d.method()[0]);
spec-ifies to
while ( AssignmentExpression, Expression ) EmptyStatement
and could be broken down to
while ( LeftHandSideExpression = AssignmentExpression, CallExpression [ Expression ] ) EmptyStatement
and could be broken down even further.
There is no semi-colon in the expression because that would create an ExpressionStatement
which is a Statement
not an Expression
.
jdalton
commented
Aug 17, 2010
To compliment Paul's explanation I will get a bit more specy. A while statement is made of the following parts In James' example spec-ifies to
and could be broken down to
and could be broken down even further. There is no semi-colon in the expression because that would create an |
Sorry about not adding comments to the original -- thanks Paul for adding some! Thanks @jdalton for the improvement! I forgot about the whole live NodeList thing... very cool! |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
marcelkorpel
Aug 17, 2010
Awesome script!
Your comment If you're in IE (>5)
is wrong. It should read If you're in IE (>=5)
marcelkorpel
commented
Aug 17, 2010
Awesome script! Your comment |
SlexAxton
commented
Aug 17, 2010
@james you should totally sign a CLA so this can get added to dojo. It's superduper easy! |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
@marcel, thanks, corrected. @SlexAxton, Okay, where do I go to sign? |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
padolsey
Aug 17, 2010
@jdalton, just noticed -- with yours, since it returns false
, expressions like ie < 7
cannot be used because ie
will be false
and Number(false)
is 0, and therefore the expression ie < 7
will return true
in non-IE browsers.
I chose undefined
as the non-IE return value because Number(undefined)
is NaN
and this means the following expressions can be used everywhere (without wrong results in non IE browsers):
ie === 6 // IE6
ie > 7 // IE8, IE9 ...
ie < 9 // Anything less than IE9:
@jdalton, just noticed -- with yours, since it returns I chose
|
@dperini, plus, using |
jdalton
commented
Aug 17, 2010
@james good point on |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
SlexAxton
Aug 17, 2010
@james http://www.dojofoundation.org/cla/ -- You can just scan it or take a picture of it or something. Then you can be a Dojo Committer!
SlexAxton
commented
Aug 17, 2010
@james http://www.dojofoundation.org/cla/ -- You can just scan it or take a picture of it or something. Then you can be a Dojo Committer! |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
paulirish
Aug 20, 2010
YUICompressor hates and ClosureCompiler strips (!) the /*@cc_on conditional compilation action..
Not the end of the world here, but fair warning.
paulirish
commented
Aug 20, 2010
YUICompressor hates and ClosureCompiler strips (!) the /*@cc_on conditional compilation action.. Not the end of the world here, but fair warning. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
marcelkorpel
Aug 20, 2010
Why do you need that early exit anyway? What does it add, apart from a very slight optimization of a function that probably runs only once?
marcelkorpel
commented
Aug 20, 2010
Why do you need that early exit anyway? What does it add, apart from a very slight optimization of a function that probably runs only once? |
dperini
commented
Aug 20, 2010
@marcel I believe your suggestion is correct, comparing IE4 to a new browser is wrong anyway ;-)
should be just enough (and shorter). |
Just got rid of the early exit (with conditional compilation). @dperini, that'd return |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
cowboy
commented
Aug 21, 2010
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
rriveras
commented
Aug 22, 2010
Really handy! Thanks |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
lifesinger
commented
Aug 25, 2010
slightly improve to get smaller: http://gist.github.com/548648 |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
peteboere
commented
Aug 27, 2010
How about simply returning NaN instead of an undefined variable? |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
balupton
Jan 23, 2011
Great stuff, what's the license? Or is it so small, that it would fall under public domain?...
balupton
commented
Jan 23, 2011
Great stuff, what's the license? Or is it so small, that it would fall under public domain?... |
@balupton, no worries, public domain. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
balupton
Jan 23, 2011
Sweet thanks a lot! and thanks Paul for showcasing this in your latest video :-)
balupton
commented
Jan 23, 2011
Sweet thanks a lot! and thanks Paul for showcasing this in your latest video :-) |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
paulirish
Jan 23, 2011
This bit has actually been incorporated into https://github.com/slexaxton/yepnope.js in the optional !ie prefix.
It's a fantastic bit of javascript.
paulirish
commented
Jan 23, 2011
This bit has actually been incorporated into https://github.com/slexaxton/yepnope.js in the optional !ie prefix. It's a fantastic bit of javascript. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
zachleat
Feb 4, 2011
Came back to use this, since it's awesome.
But I'm wondering why your counter starts at 3, when you return undefined for <=4. Shouldn't the counter start at 4?
zachleat
commented
Feb 4, 2011
Came back to use this, since it's awesome. But I'm wondering why your counter starts at 3, when you return undefined for <=4. Shouldn't the counter start at 4? |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
marcelkorpel
Feb 6, 2011
Because James uses a pre-increment to increment v
:
div.innerHTML = '<!--[if gt IE ' + (++v) + ']><i></i><![endif]-->'
so the first test actually runs with 4
; when the while
loop exits immediately, you're probably not using IE at all.
Would he have used a post-increment, then your assumption is correct, but it has the disadvantage that the version number should be decremented afterwards, otherwise the loop will end with v
being incremented after the condition to exit the loop has been met.
marcelkorpel
commented
Feb 6, 2011
Because James uses a pre-increment to increment
so the first test actually runs with Would he have used a post-increment, then your assumption is correct, but it has the disadvantage that the version number should be decremented afterwards, otherwise the loop will end with |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
zachleat
Feb 6, 2011
Ah, sure. My bad. Since I've never encountered a false positive for $.browser.msie, I had used that to toggle the test, and only used this script as a more reliable way to find the version number. Thanks.
zachleat
commented
Feb 6, 2011
Ah, sure. My bad. Since I've never encountered a false positive for $.browser.msie, I had used that to toggle the test, and only used this script as a more reliable way to find the version number. Thanks. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
davidhellsing
commented
Feb 13, 2011
Anyone know how to make this Lint? |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
marcelkorpel
commented
Feb 13, 2011
Why? This is valid JavaScript. JSLint is just very restrictive. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
davidhellsing
Feb 13, 2011
@marcel: I didn't ask why... just wondered if anyone ported this to Lint-friendly code.
davidhellsing
commented
Feb 13, 2011
@marcel: I didn't ask why... just wondered if anyone ported this to Lint-friendly code. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
marcelkorpel
Feb 13, 2011
No, you didn't, but I did. ;)
Anyway, just work around the issues JSLint complains about; e.g., only use a comparison as the condition within parentheses and do the assignment inside a statement, like:
do {
div.innerHTML = '<!--[if gt IE ' + (++v) + ']><i></i><![endif]-->';
} while (all[0]);
and make ie
a local variable.
marcelkorpel
commented
Feb 13, 2011
No, you didn't, but I did. ;) Anyway, just work around the issues JSLint complains about; e.g., only use a comparison as the condition within parentheses and do the assignment inside a statement, like:
and make |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
joacim-boive
Sep 1, 2011
Unfortunately this won't work for IE10 as they've dropped support for conditional comments:
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2011/07/06/html5-parsing-in-ie10.aspx
joacim-boive
commented
Sep 1, 2011
Unfortunately this won't work for IE10 as they've dropped support for conditional comments: |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
SlexAxton
Sep 1, 2011
That's hopefully a good thing since IE10 shouldn't need singling out compared to it's predecessors.
SlexAxton
commented
Sep 1, 2011
That's hopefully a good thing since IE10 shouldn't need singling out compared to it's predecessors. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
joacim-boive
Sep 2, 2011
Unfortunately IE10 still needs to be targeted.
Here's on of my latest problem with all versions of IE (including R10 as of today):
http://jsfiddle.net/wG8Rd/2/
Works perfectly in Chrome/Safari and Firefox.
joacim-boive
commented
Sep 2, 2011
Unfortunately IE10 still needs to be targeted. Here's on of my latest problem with all versions of IE (including R10 as of today): Works perfectly in Chrome/Safari and Firefox. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
SlexAxton
Sep 2, 2011
"Not supporting transforms" is not an IE quirk. This is a case where feature testing would be much more appropriate than IE sniffing.
SlexAxton
commented
Sep 2, 2011
"Not supporting transforms" is not an IE quirk. This is a case where feature testing would be much more appropriate than IE sniffing. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
joacim-boive
Sep 2, 2011
That's not the problem. The rotation transform works in IE 7-10 with the supplied example. The problem is that using a transform with opacity and border-radius will mess up the look of the border. (The background won't be transparent.)
border-radius works natively in IE9-10 but they both have the above problem. The easies solution is to skip the opacity, but the browser(s) needs to be targeted for this and thus it's a shame they've removed conditional comments...
joacim-boive
commented
Sep 2, 2011
That's not the problem. The rotation transform works in IE 7-10 with the supplied example. The problem is that using a transform with opacity and border-radius will mess up the look of the border. (The background won't be transparent.) border-radius works natively in IE9-10 but they both have the above problem. The easies solution is to skip the opacity, but the browser(s) needs to be targeted for this and thus it's a shame they've removed conditional comments... |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
SlexAxton
Sep 2, 2011
You generally won't have a ton of luck using old proprietary DX Transforms and mixing it with anything. It seems like comparing the DX and the CSS3 ones is a little flawed. It's also guaranteed to be phased out eventually. Something like:
.no-css-transforms .flip {
background-image:url(flipped-badge.jpg);
}
would be a safe way to not just back-fill IE 6-10, but also mobile browsers or any of the slew of browsers that have issues with transforms.
SlexAxton
commented
Sep 2, 2011
You generally won't have a ton of luck using old proprietary DX Transforms and mixing it with anything. It seems like comparing the DX and the CSS3 ones is a little flawed. It's also guaranteed to be phased out eventually. Something like: .no-css-transforms .flip {
background-image:url(flipped-badge.jpg);
} would be a safe way to not just back-fill IE 6-10, but also mobile browsers or any of the slew of browsers that have issues with transforms. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
wamatt
commented
Oct 1, 2012
Cool technique, does it matter if IE10 is not detected? |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
thelucid
Nov 13, 2012
Hmm, I wonder if this could be rolled into an IE CSS expression that adds classes to the document. That way HTML5 boilerplate could lose the comments in the HTML and instead shift it to the CSS.
thelucid
commented
Nov 13, 2012
Hmm, I wonder if this could be rolled into an IE CSS expression that adds classes to the document. That way HTML5 boilerplate could lose the comments in the HTML and instead shift it to the CSS. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
Daniel15
Nov 28, 2012
IE10 still supports JavaScript conditional comments, so you could add something like this right below this code snippet:
// IE 10 no longer supports conditional comments in HTML, but does support JavaScript conditional comments
// This will have to be revisited once IE 11 comes out... :(
if (/*@cc_on!@*/false && !ie) {
ie = 10;
You could potentially do user agent sniffing to ensure that it's indeed IE10.
Daniel15
commented
Nov 28, 2012
IE10 still supports JavaScript conditional comments, so you could add something like this right below this code snippet: // IE 10 no longer supports conditional comments in HTML, but does support JavaScript conditional comments
// This will have to be revisited once IE 11 comes out... :(
if (/*@cc_on!@*/false && !ie) {
ie = 10; You could potentially do user agent sniffing to ensure that it's indeed IE10. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
termi
Feb 6, 2013
For all how what to detect IE10:
It's almost like @Daniel15 suggestion.
(function() {
"use strict";
var tmp = (document["documentMode"] || document.attachEvent) && "ev"
, msie = tmp
&& (tmp = window[tmp + "al"])
&& tmp("/*@cc_on 1;@*/")
&& +((/msie (\d+)/i.exec(navigator.userAgent) || [])[1] || 0)
;
return msie || void 0;
})();
user-agent sniffing, yeah :(
But this would work with:
- any JS-preprocessors (GCC, for example, will delete all comments including conditional comments)
- with any IDE without errors for "eval" in "strict mode"
And still like @Daniel15 said:
"This will have to be revisited once IE 11 comes out... :("
termi
commented
Feb 6, 2013
For all how what to detect IE10: (function() {
"use strict";
var tmp = (document["documentMode"] || document.attachEvent) && "ev"
, msie = tmp
&& (tmp = window[tmp + "al"])
&& tmp("/*@cc_on 1;@*/")
&& +((/msie (\d+)/i.exec(navigator.userAgent) || [])[1] || 0)
;
return msie || void 0;
})(); user-agent sniffing, yeah :(
And still like @Daniel15 said: |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
ttfkam
Mar 2, 2013
Looks like I'm late to the party. Here's my party favor anyway.
var ie = (function(){
// for-loop saves characters over while
for( var v = 3,
// b just as good as a div with 2 fewer characters
el = document.createElement('b'),
// el.all instead of el.getElementsByTagName('i')
// empty array as loop breaker (and exception-avoider) for non-IE and IE10+
all = el.all || [];
// i tag not well-formed since we know that IE5-IE9 won't mind
el.innerHTML = '<!--[if gt IE ' + (++v) + ']><i><![endif]-->',
all[0];
);
// instead of undefined, returns the documentMode for IE10+ compatibility
// non-IE will still get undefined as before
return v > 4 ? v : document.documentMode;
}() );
Compatible with "use strict" (tested in Firefox 22 and Chrome 27). Uses no user agent string sniffing. Also compatible with all known JS minifiers as it uses no IE-specific JavaScript comments.
Minifies to 171 bytes.
var ie=function(){for(var a=3,b=document.createElement("b"),c=b.all||[];b.innerHTML="<!--[if gt IE "+ ++a+"]><i><![endif]-->",c[0];);return 4<a?a:document.documentMode}();
Unfortunately, it's now so small that gzip -9 yields 175 bytes.
ttfkam
commented
Mar 2, 2013
Looks like I'm late to the party. Here's my party favor anyway. var ie = (function(){
// for-loop saves characters over while
for( var v = 3,
// b just as good as a div with 2 fewer characters
el = document.createElement('b'),
// el.all instead of el.getElementsByTagName('i')
// empty array as loop breaker (and exception-avoider) for non-IE and IE10+
all = el.all || [];
// i tag not well-formed since we know that IE5-IE9 won't mind
el.innerHTML = '<!--[if gt IE ' + (++v) + ']><i><![endif]-->',
all[0];
);
// instead of undefined, returns the documentMode for IE10+ compatibility
// non-IE will still get undefined as before
return v > 4 ? v : document.documentMode;
}() ); Compatible with "use strict" (tested in Firefox 22 and Chrome 27). Uses no user agent string sniffing. Also compatible with all known JS minifiers as it uses no IE-specific JavaScript comments. Minifies to 171 bytes. var ie=function(){for(var a=3,b=document.createElement("b"),c=b.all||[];b.innerHTML="<!--[if gt IE "+ ++a+"]><i><![endif]-->",c[0];);return 4<a?a:document.documentMode}(); Unfortunately, it's now so small that gzip -9 yields 175 bytes. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
mvjoyner
Mar 26, 2013
I needed IE10 support, as I was using the imagesloaded plugin in combination with imgrefresh (https://code.google.com/p/image-refresh/) (so to refresh unloaded images in ie), as IE still has issues with cached images! So the check had to be extended to IE10. Here's the code. I'm not a JS guru, so I've probably brutalized it, but it does work now for IE10 -- based on Daniel15's Idea.
If someone wants to make it all sparkly again, by all means.
var ie = (function(){ var undef, v = 3, div = document.createElement('div'), all = div.getElementsByTagName('i'); while ( div.innerHTML = '', all[0] ) { ver = v; } //ie10 support if (/*@cc_on!@*/false && typeof ver === 'undefined') { ver = 10; } else { ver = 3; } return ver > 4 ? ver : undef; }());
mvjoyner
commented
Mar 26, 2013
I needed IE10 support, as I was using the imagesloaded plugin in combination with imgrefresh (https://code.google.com/p/image-refresh/) (so to refresh unloaded images in ie), as IE still has issues with cached images! So the check had to be extended to IE10. Here's the code. I'm not a JS guru, so I've probably brutalized it, but it does work now for IE10 -- based on Daniel15's Idea. If someone wants to make it all sparkly again, by all means. var ie = (function(){ var undef, v = 3, div = document.createElement('div'), all = div.getElementsByTagName('i'); while ( div.innerHTML = '', all[0] ) { ver = v; } //ie10 support if (/*@cc_on!@*/false && typeof ver === 'undefined') { ver = 10; } else { ver = 3; } return ver > 4 ? ver : undef; }()); |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
ecstaticpeon
Jul 10, 2013
Regarding IE 10 detection and following @Daniel15's idea, we can use @_jscript_version instead of the UA (see http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ie/s59bkzce%28v=vs.94%29.aspx):
var ie_version = (function() {
var undef,
v = 3,
div = document.createElement('div'),
all = div.getElementsByTagName('i');
while (
div.innerHTML = '<!--[if gt IE ' + (++v) + ']><i></i><![endif]-->',
all[0]
);
return v > 4 ? v : undef;
}());
/*@cc_on
if (typeof(ie_version) == 'undefined') {
ie_version = parseInt(@_jscript_version);
}
@*/
Note that we could only use that last if statement, but then that would return incorrect version numbers when changing the browser mode.
As mentioned before, this may break in IE 11.
ecstaticpeon
commented
Jul 10, 2013
Regarding IE 10 detection and following @Daniel15's idea, we can use @_jscript_version instead of the UA (see http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ie/s59bkzce%28v=vs.94%29.aspx):
Note that we could only use that last if statement, but then that would return incorrect version numbers when changing the browser mode. As mentioned before, this may break in IE 11. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
nrako
Aug 15, 2013
Beware I wasted an awful of time on a IE issue related to requirejs trying to eval the last version of this gist submitted by @ecstaticpeon. So if you use this through requirejs and have a http://requirejs.org/docs/errors.html#fromtexteval error msg, it's definitely because of /*@cc_on
I just added a space like this /* @cc_on
and now the eval() pass. But I didn't tested on IE10 yet... anyway I don't like this conditional compilation stuff, I'll try to find something else.
nrako
commented
Aug 15, 2013
Beware I wasted an awful of time on a IE issue related to requirejs trying to eval the last version of this gist submitted by @ecstaticpeon. So if you use this through requirejs and have a http://requirejs.org/docs/errors.html#fromtexteval error msg, it's definitely because of |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
adrien-be
Aug 23, 2013
@nrako: thanks for the heads up. But adding a space like you did does break the code. Try it on http://jsfiddle.net/P5z4N/4/
adrien-be
commented
Aug 23, 2013
@nrako: thanks for the heads up. But adding a space like you did does break the code. Try it on http://jsfiddle.net/P5z4N/4/ |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
adrien-be
Aug 23, 2013
@nrako: here is a different version that might work for you :)
Try it on http://jsfiddle.net/e8G3S/1/
// Returns the version of Internet Explorer or a -1 (indicating the use of another browser)
function getInternetExplorerVersion(){
var rv = -1; // Return value assumes failure.
if (navigator.appName == 'Microsoft Internet Explorer'){
var ua = navigator.userAgent;
var re = new RegExp("MSIE ([0-9]{1,}[\.0-9]{0,})");
if (re.exec(ua) != null)
rv = parseFloat( RegExp.$1 );
}
return rv;
}
function displayAlert(){
var msg = "You're not using Internet Explorer.";
var ver = getInternetExplorerVersion();
if ( ver > -1 ){
if ( ver <= 8.0 ){
msg = "You're using Internet Explorer 8 or below" ;
}
else if ( ver >= 9.0 && ver < 10.0 ){
msg = "You're using IE 9 or above";
}
else{
msg = "You're using IE 10";
}
}
alert( msg );
}
adrien-be
commented
Aug 23, 2013
@nrako: here is a different version that might work for you :) Try it on http://jsfiddle.net/e8G3S/1/
|
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
nrako
Aug 26, 2013
@adrien-be indeed it fail on IE10, the last code you sent is quite different it's solely useragent sniffing, and I still love the conditional comment better, I (and requirejs) just don't like the condition compilation stuff for IE10 detection.
nrako
commented
Aug 26, 2013
@adrien-be indeed it fail on IE10, the last code you sent is quite different it's solely useragent sniffing, and I still love the conditional comment better, I (and requirejs) just don't like the condition compilation stuff for IE10 detection. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
ghost
Sep 10, 2013
Smaller yet? https://gist.github.com/devxdev/6506658
I Can't test I'm on Ubuntu. maybe smaller if undefined
isn't required in the last ()
ghost
commented
Sep 10, 2013
Smaller yet? https://gist.github.com/devxdev/6506658 I Can't test I'm on Ubuntu. maybe smaller if |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
moussahoumani
Nov 3, 2013
The expression in the while statement was done proper though for clarity I'd use a do-while.
Interesting :{D, fail on IE10, the last code you sent looks odd to me mainly because agent sniffing, I find the conditional comment interesting, I and requires just don't like the condition compilation stuff for IE10 detection. Because James uses a pre-increment to increment v:
moussahoumani
commented
Nov 3, 2013
The expression in the while statement was done proper though for clarity I'd use a do-while. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
ghost
commented
Nov 7, 2013
(+/-) from the grade listed. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
ghost
commented
Nov 7, 2013
(+/-) from the grade listed. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
ghost
commented
Nov 7, 2013
(+/-) from the grade listed. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
ghost
commented
Nov 7, 2013
(+/-) from the grade listed. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
davidhellsing
Nov 22, 2013
I wanted this script to include IE10+11 as well, and my tests works fine by just returning document.documentMode
instead of undefined, since it will be undefined for non-IE browsers anyway (I also prefer do...while...):
var ie = (function() {
var v = 3
, div = document.createElement( 'div' )
, all = div.getElementsByTagName( 'i' )
do
div.innerHTML = '<!--[if gt IE ' + (++v) + ']><i></i><![endif]-->'
while
(all[0])
return v > 4 ? v : document.documentMode
}())
davidhellsing
commented
Nov 22, 2013
I wanted this script to include IE10+11 as well, and my tests works fine by just returning
|
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
ghost
Jan 23, 2014
So I tried the code above, also davidhellsing's version, and I tested this on ie8, and it always says it's version 7, when it's 8. So I don't think this works on ie8.
ghost
commented
Jan 23, 2014
So I tried the code above, also davidhellsing's version, and I tested this on ie8, and it always says it's version 7, when it's 8. So I don't think this works on ie8. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
ghost
commented
Jan 23, 2014
Also, just tried it in ie10 and ie gets declared as undefined. |
human-a
commented
Mar 15, 2014
@ttfkam Best Solution for IE10+ |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
alextreppass
May 2, 2014
For any future spelunkers, the @davidhellsing version just above works fine on IE8 through IE11
alextreppass
commented
May 2, 2014
For any future spelunkers, the @davidhellsing version just above works fine on IE8 through IE11 |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
tadudek
Aug 8, 2014
If I'm testing IE11, but it's forced into ie8 via 'IE=EmulateIE8', this solution from @davidhellsing still show the IE version as 8, not as 11. Any thoughts? I want to determine if it's really IE10/11.
tadudek
commented
Aug 8, 2014
If I'm testing IE11, but it's forced into ie8 via 'IE=EmulateIE8', this solution from @davidhellsing still show the IE version as 8, not as 11. Any thoughts? I want to determine if it's really IE10/11. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
hayatbiralem
commented
Jun 16, 2015
You can use bowser. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
taveras
commented
Jun 18, 2015
This is slick! |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
tamer1an
commented
Jul 2, 2015
Unfortunately IE>=10 don't have conditional comments |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
jeremykohn
Oct 12, 2015
The best option for IE / Edge these days is probably Layout Engine or something similar that uses JavaScript to detect browser features.
User agents can be forged or altered so I wouldn't rely on UA sniffing.
jeremykohn
commented
Oct 12, 2015
The best option for IE / Edge these days is probably Layout Engine or something similar that uses JavaScript to detect browser features. User agents can be forged or altered so I wouldn't rely on UA sniffing. |
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment
Hide comment
This comment has been minimized.
Show comment Hide comment
Webnewbies
Jan 18, 2016
Maybe help:
var ie = 'NotIE'; //IE5-11
if( !!document.compatMode ) {
if( !!(Math && Math.acosh) ) ie = 'EDGE 12';
if( !!document.uniqueID){
if(!!window.ActiveXObject){ ie = 11; }
else if(!!document.all){
if(!!window.atob){ie = 10;}
else if(!!document.addEventListener) {ie = 9;}
else if(!!document.querySelector){ie = 8;}
else if(!!window.XMLHttpRequest){ie = 7;}
else if(!!document.compatMode){ie = 6;}
else ie = 5;
}
}
}
Webnewbies
commented
Jan 18, 2016
Maybe help: var ie = 'NotIE'; //IE5-11 |
This is hawt. I love the way you use the expression in the
while
statement though it could be done with ado-while
for clarity. Very cool :{D