Dojo Eval Debugging

[toonetown]

I just noticed your post at http://blog.getfirebug.com/2009/11/02/dojo-faq-on-eval-debugging-out-of-date/
and have updated the FAQ page.

It appears however, that the original FAQ identifies this as a bug in
mozilla's jsd code - not in firebug.  From the comment at
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=307984#c34, it appears
that firebug has a workaround in place for that issue - is that the
case?

Thanks

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Firebug" group.
To post to this group, send email to firebug@....
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to firebug+unsubscribe@....
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/firebug?hl=en.

[toonetown]

BTW - in order to get a trac account for bugs.dojotoolkit.org, you
just need to create an account at www.dojotoolkit.org.  The same
account is used in both places.

-Nathan

On Nov 3, 12:46 pm, toonetown <nathan.to...@...> wrote:
> I just noticed your post athttp://blog.getfirebug.com/2009/11/02/dojo-faq-on-eval-debugging-out-...
> and have updated the FAQ page.
>
> It appears however, that the original FAQ identifies this as a bug in
> mozilla's jsd code - not in firebug.  From the comment athttps://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=307984#c34, it appears
> that firebug has a workaround in place for that issue - is that the
> case?
>
> Thanks

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Firebug" group.
To post to this group, send email to firebug@....
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to firebug+unsubscribe@....
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/firebug?hl=en.

[John J Barton]

On Nov 3, 11:46 am, toonetown <nathan.to...@...> wrote:
> I just noticed your post athttp://blog.getfirebug.com/2009/11/02/dojo-faq-on-eval-debugging-out-...
> and have updated the FAQ page.

Thanks!

>
> It appears however, that the original FAQ identifies this as a bug in
> mozilla's jsd code - not in firebug.  From the comment athttps://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=307984#c34, it appears
> that firebug has a workaround in place for that issue - is that the
> case?

Mozilla's jsd code does not support eval() debugging. Specifically it
assigns the caller's source file name to the eval() buffer, so the
line numbers from the eval() overlap the line numbers of the caller.
In Firebug I fix this by breakpointing on every script compilation,
examining the call stack to determine that eval() is involved,
computing an MD% hash of the eval() buffer, and using the hash to
track the buffer for debugging.

jjb


>
> Thanks

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Firebug" group.
To post to this group, send email to firebug@....
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to firebug+unsubscribe@....
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/firebug?hl=en.

[John J Barton]

On Nov 3, 11:46 am, toonetown <nathan.to...@...> wrote:
> I just noticed your post athttp://blog.getfirebug.com/2009/11/02/dojo-faq-on-eval-debugging-out-...
> and have updated the FAQ page.

Well I'm sorry but the FAQ is just wrong. To the best of my knowledge,
the title is just incorrect:

Why does the Mozilla debugger (Venkman/Firebug/Aptana) report all
errors in loader.js?

Firebug should not report errors in loader.js. Aptana uses Firebug. So
the correct title would be

Why does Venkman report all errors in loader.js?

jjb

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Firebug" group.
To post to this group, send email to firebug@....
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to firebug+unsubscribe@....
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/firebug?hl=en.

[toonetown]

I have fixed the title as well now.

On Nov 3, 11:03 pm, John J Barton <johnjbar...@...> wrote:

> On Nov 3, 11:46 am, toonetown <nathan.to...@...> wrote:
>
> > I just noticed your post athttp://blog.getfirebug.com/2009/11/02/dojo-faq-on-eval-debugging-out-...
> > and have updated the FAQ page.
>
> Well I'm sorry but the FAQ is just wrong. To the best of my knowledge,
> the title is just incorrect:
>
> Why does the Mozilla debugger (Venkman/Firebug/Aptana) report all
> errors in loader.js?
>
> Firebug should not report errors in loader.js. Aptana uses Firebug. So
> the correct title would be
>
> Why does Venkman report all errors in loader.js?
>
> jjb

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Firebug" group.
To post to this group, send email to firebug@....
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to firebug+unsubscribe@....
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/firebug?hl=en.

[John J Barton]

Thanks, I updated the blog entry. jjb

On Nov 4, 12:34 pm, toonetown <nathan.to...@...> wrote:

> I have fixed the title as well now.
>
> On Nov 3, 11:03 pm, John J Barton <johnjbar...@...> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 3, 11:46 am, toonetown <nathan.to...@...> wrote:
>
> > > I just noticed your post athttp://blog.getfirebug.com/2009/11/02/dojo-faq-on-eval-debugging-out-...
> > > and have updated the FAQ page.
>
> > Well I'm sorry but the FAQ is just wrong. To the best of my knowledge,
> > the title is just incorrect:
>
> > Why does the Mozilla debugger (Venkman/Firebug/Aptana) report all
> > errors in loader.js?
>
> > Firebug should not report errors in loader.js. Aptana uses Firebug. So
> > the correct title would be
>
> > Why does Venkman report all errors in loader.js?
>
> > jjb
>
>

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Firebug" group.
To post to this group, send email to firebug@....
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to firebug+unsubscribe@....
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/firebug?hl=en.