New extension: Webhooks (TurboHook replacement)

[CubesterYT]

Hello all!

The time has finally come, the long awaited successor to the horrendous extension that is "TurboHook". Under code name "TurboHook V2", this extension took time to develop as I waited for certain APIs to happen (extension storage my beloved), and also just forgetting about the extension in the first place 😅. I deemed it smart to make this a whole new extension entirely, and TurboHook will now be hidden.

Video Example:

2025-01-16.23-49-59.mp4

Honestly, I'm going to consider this extension my Magnum Opus at the moment, since this represents my growth since I first contributed here. The difference between TurboHook and this extension is insane.

[SharkPool-SP]

seems good now

[yuri-kiss]

last change then im gonna review the docs

[GarboMuffin]

you need to await prompt() so that it works in the desktop app

ill read the rest of it later today

[CubesterYT]

you need to await prompt() so that it works in the desktop app

ill read the rest of it later today

OHHHH SO THAT'S WHY IT BROKE IN THE DESKTOP APP DURING MY TESTING

I'll get to fixing it

[GarboMuffin]

1. make a project with a webhook
2. save it
3. reload the page
4. load saved project
5. all the blocks are still hidden

[GarboMuffin]

dont like how empty try/catch is being used everywhere to handle errors

as it is right now a project can make a block that contains something like toString as the menu name and then store data on Object.prototype.toString.DATA and Object.prototype.toString.TYPE which probably doesn't break anything but it's definitely not great to do that. better to check if the webhook exists first

[GarboMuffin]

TurboHook still has functionality that this doesn't have, specifically the ability to send to arbitrary webhooks not known until runtime

[CubesterYT]

TurboHook still has functionality that this doesn't have, specifically the ability to send to arbitrary webhooks not known until runtime

I'm confused, what do you mean by this?

[GarboMuffin]

[CubesterYT]

Ah, I see
The plan with this remake is to only store webhooks, but not defined till runtime. I could make adjustments...

By the way, all these things in TurboHook like content, image, and whatever only work with Discord and Discord similar syntax Webhooks, meaning it's not at ALL like how Webhooks in general work. It's only like this since it started as a Discord Webhook extension.

[Brackets-Coder]

I really like this extension idea. TW web hooks could change the way we do things... I'll be waiting.

[GarboMuffin]

This is for sending webhooks, which is already possible, this is just a more elegant way

Do you want webhooks the other direction?

[CubesterYT]

This is for sending webhooks, which is already possible, this is just a more elegant way

Do you want webhooks the other direction?

@GarboMuffin I think I mentioned this in passing a year ago during TurboHook, but I had an idea where we could have our own webhook system as well to allow users to make their own Webhooks and receive data. We could incorporate this with this extension.

[Brackets-Coder]

This is for sending webhooks, which is already possible, this is just a more elegant way

Do you want webhooks the other direction?

Yes, I'm aware it was already possible, I'm just remarking at how much better this extension is than TurboHook

I think webhooks in both directions would be fantastic

[yuri-kiss]

Ah, I see The plan with this remake is to only store webhooks, but not defined till runtime. I could make adjustments...

By the way, all these things in TurboHook like content, image, and whatever only work with Discord and Discord similar syntax Webhooks, meaning it's not at ALL like how Webhooks in general work. It's only like this since it started as a Discord Webhook extension.

You could make a temporary webhook block to "polyfill" the usage of the old turbohook block if needed.