This method is usually used with loops, and it should be a tiny bit more efficient to use an iterator directly rather than first iterating through ` Map`-values to create a temporary `Array` that we finally iterate through at the call-site.
Note that the `getRawValues` method is old code, and originally the `Dict` class stored its data in a regular `Object`, hence why the old code was written that way.
This method is usually used with loops, and it should be a tiny bit more efficient to use an iterator directly rather than first iterating through ` Map`-keys to create a temporary `Array` that we finally iterate through at the call-site.
Note that the `getKeys` method is old code, and originally the `Dict` class stored its data in a regular `Object`, hence why the old code was written that way.
This changes a number of loops currently using `Dict.prototype.{getKeys, getRaw}`, since it should be a tiny bit more efficient to use an iterator directly rather than first iterating through `Map`-keys to create a temporary `Array` that we finally iterate through at the call-site.
Note that the `getKeys` method is much older than `getRawEntries`, and originally the `Dict` class stored its data in a regular `Object`, hence why the old code was written that way.
In practice we've not accepted PRs with "manual" changes of any non `en-US` locales for many years, however some (older) README/FAQ entries can perhaps be seen as actually inviting such PRs.
Now that l10n updates are running automatically via GitHub Actions, see PR 20749, we're definitely not going to accept any "manual" translation patches so it cannot hurt to de-emphasize localization in various README files.
(Also, since all relevant Fluent files have license headers it doesn't seem meaningful to mention that in the l10n README.)
The user has to select some pages and then click on the "Save As" menu item in the Manage menu.
If they modify the structure of the pdf (deleted, moved, copied pages), they have to use the usual
save button.
Working on PR 20784, I couldn't help noticing that this code can be improved a little bit.
- Only initialize `PdfTextExtractor` in development mode and MOZCENTRAL builds, since it's unused elsewhere.
- Re-factor how `PdfTextExtractor` waits for the viewer to be available/ready, by using existing (internal) events.
This simplifies the `PdfTextExtractor` class and removes its `setViewer` method, which improves general consistency since normally the viewer-components don't use such a method in that way (here it was effectively used as a stand-in for a `setDocument` method).
- Finally, while slightly unrelated, rename the `#getAllTextInProgress` field in the `PDFViewer` class to `#copyAllInProgress` to clearly indicate what it's for since the `getAllText` method is used more generally now.
Given that extracting all text can take a while to complete, especially in long PDF documents[1], it's technically possible for the user to "select all", copy, and finally abort copying (with the `Esc` key) while `PdfTextExtractor.prototype.extractTextContent` is still running.
If that happens the `PDFViewer.prototype.getAllText` code would be interrupted, and text-extraction would thus fail in an intermittent and (likely) hard to debug way. To avoid this we replace the current "global" interrupt handling with an optional `AbortSignal` instead.
---
[1] See e.g. `pdf.pdf` in the test-suite.
This solves [bug 1989406](https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1989406).
(“The user should be able to dismiss the in-content message displayed by clicking somewhere else in the PDF”)
There’s a good gif there that shows the problematic behavior.
In the thread, there are also mentions of 2 similar but slightly separate problems:
* clicking on another highlight should also dismiss
* the mention that hitting the escape key does not dismiss
I found the last point, the escape key, to work already (first test case here).
But this PR solves the main bug (second test case) and the adjacent one
(third test case).
It works by using the existing `unselectAll` handling.
Hopefully I'm not misunderstanding why it was written like that, however using an existing method should be a tiny bit more efficient than querying the DOM.
