Metric Cooking 的评价
Metric Cooking 作者: Falk Hüffner
Nibinaear 的评价
11 条评价
- 评分 1 / 5来自 MissChris,1 年前It works just fine for converting US measurements to metric, but I need the opposite. Someone please work on that for us.
- 评分 5 / 5来自 Chon,4 年前
- 评分 5 / 5来自 Tom,4 年前
- 评分 5 / 5来自 Firefox 用户 15222707,5 年前
- 评分 5 / 5来自 Firefox 用户 13970150,7 年前Not just an excellent simple converter, but will attempt volume-to-weight conversion, e.g. 1 cup of sugar -> 200 g sugar. Love it!
- 评分 5 / 5来自 PeaceByJesus.net,8 年前Great idea, but what we need is an extension that will convert metric units into standard US sizes. The ones that used to do so no longer work on current Firefox builds.
- 评分 5 / 5来自 Pelagius,8 年前I don't need to go to weight conversion websites anymore! (http://www.kingarthurflour.com/learn/ingredient-weight-chart.html is a good one, by the way.)
All of the weights I need are right there on the page, this is wonderful. It does not take 20 seconds to run on my machine, more like one or two seconds like the developer reported. - 评分 5 / 5来自 Francijn,8 年前This Add-on really changes the text of the recipe, by adding metric measurements between square brackets. It will take some time (like 20 secs?) but then it will even take into account the mass density. I checked some of the conversions, and saw no mistakes. Awesome!
*Edit: I cannot add an answer to your question, Falk Hüffner, so I add it here.
I randomly tried the add-on here:
http://www.foodandwine.com/recipes/minnys-chocolate-pie
Today I tried again, and it took me 26 seconds.
My computer: a Toshiba Satellite L350D laptop
Operating system: Linux, Ubuntu 14.04 LTS
Browser: Mozilla Firefox 48.0开发者回应
发布于 8 年前Thanks for the review! It's not really supposed to take 20 seconds, maybe one at most, can you tell me what kind of computer you use and which page you tried?
*Edit: Unfortunately, I cannot reproduce this problem, on my machine it takes less than half a second on this page. My best guess is that Firefox's regexp library doesn't work well on your CPU (this add-on is fairly demanding on regexp performance). Not sure what to do about this, sorry :-(