Review by OM_RA
Rated 5 out of 5
by OM_RA, 4 years agoIt does the job, although I wish it could work in the source code of web pages.
17 reviews
- Rated 5 out of 5by Lampe2020, 10 months agoI don't know why this isn't core functionality in Firefox and why this extension isn't among Mozilla's "Recommended" either.
This extension is an immediate improvement, because I now have a much easier time understanding source files that I open in Firefox.
Some slight changes for this to be perfect would be to enable autodetect by default and to choose a more contrasty colour scheme by default (Qt Creator Light/Dark maybe) so the highlighted text doesn't fade into the background. - Rated 5 out of 5by MP3Martin, a year ago
- Rated 5 out of 5by Fabian B., 2 years ago
- Rated 5 out of 5by Mohammad Banisaeid, 2 years ago
- Rated 5 out of 5by yazpower, 3 years ago
- Rated 4 out of 5by Davide, 3 years agoSo it only works for RAW files, not on the pages itself, is that correct?
Thank you :-)Developer response
posted 3 years agoYes, that's correct: raw files (with a few exceptions that won't work, those on raw.githubusercontent.com being a notable one).
We could technically inject the library code to colour elements on regular pages, but I wouldn't really know what to colour exactly, it depends too much on the page. Doing all `` blocks could be a thing maybe, or we could imagine adding a feature to selectively colour a block, but there's nothing of the sort supported by the add-on at the moment. - Rated 5 out of 5by Vedun, 4 years ago
- Rated 5 out of 5by Firefox user 16892439, 4 years ago
- Rated 3 out of 5by weiss, 7 years agoNot bad, but doesn't work on github RAW files, so it is pretty much useless for me :( Anyway, a custom scheme import functionality would be nice.
Developer response
posted 7 years agoThanks for the feedback, and sorry to hear that about the GitHub raw files :(. In case you haven't seen it already, there are explanations about it here [0].
For the color schemes, I'm relying on the schemes providing by highlight.js. I don't really have the motivation for adding an “import” feature (but would possibly accept a PR). I'll file an issue to acknowledge and keep track of the request, though.
[0] https://github.com/Qeole/Enlight/issues/8 - Rated 4 out of 5by Firefox user 14068156, 7 years ago
- Rated 5 out of 5by slazil, 7 years agoOverall is excellent ext!
On note. Settings for autohilite and other one are not saved, so I must click 'autodetect' each time.Developer response
posted 7 years agoThanks for using the add-on, and for your feedback!
If the settings are not saved, this is a bug, I'll try to investigate. Any chance you can tell me about your OS and Firefox version, please? Here or on this GitHub issue: https://github.com/Qeole/Enlight/issues/9 - Rated 4 out of 5by enderandpeter, 8 years agoI thought it was missing PHP, but it was just not in an obvious place. There's an initial list of what I guess are commonly requested languages and then suddenly it's an alphabetical list. Maybe the whole thing should be alphabetical for such a long list.
Developer response
posted 8 years agoThank you for the feedback!
The library that is used by the add-on makes a distinction between a set of “most-common languages”, and all other languages it supports. For technical reasons, this add-on initially supported just this restricted set of languages. When I added all the other ones (including PHP), I appended them to the list. So in fact this makes two alphabetical lists: a first one with the “most-common languages” (as presented by the library, I'm not actually trying to classify languages here), and a second one below, with all other languages.
I understand that this might be confusing. Maybe I will change it in the future. Ideally, I would like to implement an option to switch between the complete list of languages, or just the restricted subset. One advantage would be that auto-detection goes much faster when the library is compiled for fewer languages…
Anyway, thanks again! - Rated 4 out of 5by Ludwig, 8 years agoWorks. However, the settings could be better. It's hard to find a good, bright color scheme without a quick preview.
- Rated 5 out of 5by Firefox user 13189945, 8 years ago
- Rated 5 out of 5by jalcine, 8 years ago