Qlik SaaS Mashup ChunkLoadError - SyntaxError: Unexpected token '?'

[hliang]

Hi All,

Recently I have built a mashup for one of my clients using capability API based on the Qlik developer tutorial. It worked perfectly on the most up-to-date browsers (e.g., Chrome Ver 110)., and it was also working fine as early as 2023 Feb 16 in their Cisco Vision Dynamic Signage Director - Digital Media Player System (firmware BrightSign 8.0.94), which is a digital signage media player that has the capability to display HTML5 web contents.

The browser engine used by this line of systems usually was quite old, some might not even support ES6 features. It took me quite some effort to even get require js work properly for this system.

However, from last week, when the client tried to open the mashup on the system, it displayed as blank screen. In the backend log, the following log could be found:

[  347.766] [ERROR]  [source https://myclient.ap.qlikcloud.com/resources/8851.6332b85f99e99f08c784.js:2]: Uncaught SyntaxError: Unexpected token ? 
[  347.789] [ERROR]  [source https://myclient.ap.qlikcloud.com/resources/assets/external/requirejs/require.js?_=1678684596028:2]: Uncaught (in promise) ChunkLoadError: Loading chunk 8851 failed.
[  347.789] (missing: https://myclient.ap.qlikcloud.com/resources/8851.6332b85f99e99f08c784.js) 

It would seem that for some reason, the chunk script 8851 retrieved by require js had a syntax error on one of the question mark when it was being parsed. The same 8851 chunk script doesn't seem to encounter any issue when it was opened from other browsers.

We were not able to identify which '?' was the one that caused the issue as the chunk script was minified and only had two lines. 

And as mentioned before, it was working without issue at late as Feb 16. 

Was there any changes deployed from Qlik regarding this, and is there a work around?

Let me know if you need me to attach the script, but it essentially was the same as the Qlik developer tutorial apart from the authentication part.

Thanks,

Michael 

[hliang]

To provide some further information, I have tested using a Chrome 69 browser (the system mentioned was using a Chrome 65 or 69), and it seems that even just opening Qlik SaaS directly would have the chunk loader error from chunk 8851, and the error seems to be from the first instance of "this.basePath??", a nullish coalescing operator. Quick research seems to indicate that Chrome did not support it until version 80 ("nullish coalescing" | Can I use... Support tables for HTML5, CSS3, etc).

My question is, if we have no means of updating the browser version (assuming some other users could also get stuck to older version of browsers due to various reasons), would it be something that the Qlik side could configure to ensure that the script could be parsed even for older browsers that don't support nullish coalescing operator?

All other workaround suggestions are greatly welcomed. 

[Aiham_Azmeh]

Hi @hliang ,

AFAIK, there is no workaround for this, the customers need to update their browsers.

Supported browsers page: https://help.qlik.com/en-US/cloud-services/Subsystems/Hub/Content/Sense_Hub/Introduction/qcs-support... 

Unfortunately, I am not sure if this was really helpful... 

[hliang]

Hi Aiham,

Thanks for your reply. I had a look at your supported browser page, and it doesn't seem to specify which Chrome version it supports and which one it no longer does. 

And I recall that Qlik SaaS was launch in 2019 while Chrome version 80 was introduced in 2020, so I think it should be safe to assume that the Chrome versions earlier than 80 that don't support nullish coalescing operator should have been supported by Qlik SaaS before (particularly considering the fact that the mashup was working on Feb 16, 2023, just a month ago)? 

If there is information about which particular Chrome version that Qlik ceases to support, I think this is a very important information that should have been made publicly available somewhere, as our mashup project was developed under the assumption that it would work with Chrome version 65 or 69 (as the page doesn't specify versions), and the system has very limited possibilities for browser upgrade.

Thanks,

Michael