Michcio
/
shadowfacts.net
forked from shadowfacts/shadowfacts.net
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Fix typos

This commit is contained in:
Shadowfacts 2022-06-14 10:19:42 -04:00
parent 0400e1d611
commit be7e1439bc
2 changed files with 2 additions and 2 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

2
site/posts/2021-03-17-minecraft-mod-statistics/index.md
View File

@ -289,7 +289,7 @@ Next up: Java versions. Every single request was made with Java 8, which is unsu
<p class="chart-caption container">The number of requests made with each Java version, along with the percentage of the total requests that version accounted for.</p>
</div>
Far and away the most popular version was Java 8 update 51. I'm not certain, but I believe this may have been the version of Java that shipped with the Minecraft launcher. This chart is limited to only versions that account for 1% or more of the total requests, so it's not visible, but 6,056 of the requests (0.063%) were made with versions of Java that identiy themselves as being OpenJDK, instead of the regular Oracle JDK/JRE. Additionally, a whole 37 requests (0.00039%) were made with versions of Java that included RedHat in the version string.
Far and away the most popular version was Java 8 update 51. I'm not certain, but I believe this may have been the version of Java that shipped with the Minecraft launcher. This chart is limited to only versions that account for 1% or more of the total requests, so it's not visible, but 6,056 of the requests (0.063%) were made with versions of Java that identify themselves as being OpenJDK, instead of the regular Oracle JDK/JRE. Additionally, a whole 37 requests (0.00039%) were made with versions of Java that included RedHat in the version string.
Next, broken down by country. This isn't perfectly accurate, since IP addresses aren't terribly reliable for determining location. But at only country granularity, it's acceptable.

2
site/posts/2022-01-30-wkwebview-scroll-indicators-again.md
View File

@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ As my luck would have it, just a few weeks after I published my [last post](/202
Some time ago, a bug was filed against WebKit because setting `scrollIndicatorStyle` on a web view's scroll view was broken on iOS 15. The fix for this bug landed in iOS 15.4 and it subtly changed the behavior of WKScrollView when it comes to the indicator style.
The bug was fixed by tracking whether the web view client has overriden the scroll indicator style and, if so, blocking the web view from resetting it internally. Unfortunately, it [does this](https://github.com/WebKit/WebKit/blob/1dbd34cf01d8b5aedcb8820b13cb6553ed60e8ed/Source/WebKit/UIProcess/ios/WKScrollView.mm#L247) by checking if the new indicator style is not `.default`. So, even if you set it to `.default` to make it automatically switch based on system appearance, the scroll view will interpret that to mean it the indicator style hasn't been overriden and continue erroneously setting it based on background color (or, in my case, the non-opaqueness of the web view).
The bug was fixed by tracking whether the web view client has overriden the scroll indicator style and, if so, blocking the web view from resetting it internally. Unfortunately, it [does this](https://github.com/WebKit/WebKit/blob/1dbd34cf01d8b5aedcb8820b13cb6553ed60e8ed/Source/WebKit/UIProcess/ios/WKScrollView.mm#L247) by checking if the new indicator style is not `.default`. So, even if you set it to `.default` to make it automatically switch based on system appearance, the scroll view will interpret that to mean the indicator style hasn't been overriden and continue erroneously setting it based on background color (or, in my case, the non-opaqueness of the web view).
The solution is simple, if annoying. You need to check the current user interface style and select the appropriate scroll indicator style yourself.