I guess there's a precedent in the inspector where you can enable
various development-related bits (like "enable resource tracking").
Maybe there's a reasonable place to hook in UI for that there.
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Darin Fisher <da...@chromium.org> wrote:
> I think that is a reasonable feature request. It would be nice however if
> there were some way to know when to restore the old behavior.
> Unfortunately, Chrome won't know when you are done.
> -Darin
>
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 2:10 PM, Mike Morearty <m...@morearty.com> wrote:
>>
>> We just discussed that, and decided against using it, because it could be
>> potentially confusing. Most users would be unaware that we were launching
>> in a separate profile, and even someone who did know that we were doing this
>> would probably find it inconvenient. For example, if he does open another
>> tab in the Chrome instance that we launched, and then browse for a bit, he
>> would now have two separate browser histories -- his main one and the one in
>> our separate user profile. Could get to be a nuisance.
>>
>> For now, I think we're going to go ahead and launch with
>> --disable-hang-monitor, and we may also write a tech note for our users
>> explaining the issue, and suggesting that if they want to, they can add
>> --disable-hang-monitor to the shortcut they use to launch Chrome. I might
>> also log an enhancement request that if my new instance of Chrome passes
>> control to an existing instance, it also pass the value of the
>> --disable-hang-monitor flag, and that the existing instance respects that
>> flag for just that one tab.
>>
>> Thanks! - Mike
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 11:49 AM, Adam Barth <aba...@chromium.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> You can try using the --user-data-dir flag to point the test instance
>>> of Chrome at a dedicated testing profile. That will mean the
>>> --disable-hang-monitor instance will actually stay around.
>>>
>>> Adam
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Mike Morearty <m...@morearty.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > I'm a developer at Adobe, on the Flash Builder (formerly Flex Builder)
>>> > team. I'm trying to figure out how to allow --disable-hang-monitor to
>>> > work even if Chrome is already running.
>>> >
>>> > Flash Builder, for those who aren't familiar with it, is a full IDE
>>> > for creating Flash (and AIR) apps; one of its features is a debugger.
>>> > So let's say you create a new project, set a breakpoint, and then
>>> > click Debug. We launch your browser pointing at the Flash app; the
>>> > Flash player that is inside the browser connects back to Flash
>>> > Builder.
>>> >
>>> > Then let's say the Flash app hits the line where the breakpoint is.
>>> > The Flash player notifies Flash Builder of the breakpoint, and then
>>> > blocks, waiting on a socket until Flash Builder tells it what to do
>>> > next (e.g. resume, single-step, etc.).
>>> >
>>> > The problem is that 30 seconds later, Chrome detects this as a hang
>>> > (which it is, but it's a deliberate one), and puts up the usual
>>> > message:
>>> >
>>> > The following plug-in is unresponsive: Shockwave Flash
>>> > Would you like to stop it?
>>> >
>>> > Even if I say No, the message keeps reappearing every 30 seconds or
>>> > so.
>>> >
>>> > I'd like to disable the message during debugging. It's easy to launch
>>> > chrome with --disable-hang-monitor, and that does work, but only if
>>> > Chrome wasn't already running before I began my debugging session. If
>>> > Chrome *was* already running, then that flag has no effect. (I
>>> > suspect probably the new instance of chrome.exe just passed control
>>> > over to the existing instance, or something like that, and did not
>>> > tell Chrome to use this flag.)
>>> >
>>> > I realize this is somewhat tricky to do. Ideally, that flag would
>>> > apply to just the one tab or window that I tried to open, but not to
>>> > all the other already-existing windows. I have not yet looked at the
>>> > Chrome/Chromium source code, but I wouldn't be surprised if this is
>>> > currently implemented as a global setting.
>>> >
>>> > Is this feasible? Is there some other way to do what I want? Should
>>> > I log an enhancement request?
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> >
>>> > - Mike Morearty
>>> > Sr. Computer Scienstist
>>> > Adobe Systems Inc.
>>> >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
