Welcome to ReverseEagle
Let’s take an extra step forward to create a private, free, and healthy internet, and software that you can trust.
We remove proprietary code from FOSS projects.
Too many projects that claim to be a bastion of privacy have been overtaken by the influence of corporations.
The whole idea of FOSS is being torn apart by companies who don’t have our best interests at heart.
- Homepage: https://reverseeagle.org
- [matrix] community: +reverseeagle:linuxcafe.chat
- Mastodon: @ReverseEagle@floss.social
- 0 Users Online
- 138 Subscribers
- 55 Posts
- 170 Comments
- Discussion
- Modlog
- mods:
Well to be honest if you don’t use their services you don’t have any problem (at least I think so) , but if a user does it simply makes it work . I totally agree with the comment on that file
agreed, judicious use of eslint-disable is ok when warranted
That code runs regardless of whether or not the user is using Google services.
Never in my life I tried to learn JavaScript , but doesn’t the eslint-disabled means that thing isn’t used ?
ESLint is purely for code style: spaces; indentation, etc. It has nothing to do with the execution of the JavaScript.
The “eslint-disabled” comments just disable the linter. The nonfree Google code is still executed by the JavaScript interpreter, in the context of the application, which is rather problematic.
Allow me to explain: the
(() => {})()creates an arrow function (shorthand for creating a function). All arrow functions are expressions, so the()calls the arrow function. It’s not bound to a variable, so the code inside the arrow function is immediately executed.