stevedlawrence commented on code in PR #1471:
URL: https://github.com/apache/daffodil-vscode/pull/1471#discussion_r2451823221


##########
vite/dev.vite.config.mjs:
##########
@@ -45,41 +45,30 @@ const packageData = jsoncParse(
 const pkg_version = packageData['version']
 const scalaVersions = ['2.12', '2.13', '3']
 
-function unzipAfterBuild() {
+function copyDebuggerOutAfterBuild() {

Review Comment:
   > The reason this is done is so that when either debugging the extension 
locally or running through a VSIX file the debuggers would be in the same root 
directory as the other relevant files.
   
   Just curious, is everything needing to be in the root directory a 
requirement to debug the extension, or does this just make things easier? For 
example, is it not possible to point the debugger to dist/package, or does it 
just add extra steps and make debugging more complicated?
   
   I ask because it feels difficult to maintain two different ways of building 
the extension. I'm also concerned that if most developers use `devbuild`, it 
could be very easy for the normal package build to not really be tested as much 
and not realize that some change made to dev.vite.config.mjs needed to be made 
to package.vite.config.mjs but didn't. Maybe if the two .mjs files were 
combined into one with a flag that determines debug vs release that might make 
it a bit easier to see exactly what the differences are? Running diff on the 
two files it's hard to see what's difference, but made it's just a bad diff and 
they are actually quite similar?
   
   I won't block this change, and your suggested change sounds reasonable if 
this is the best approach to dev vs non-dev builds, just wondering if there's 
an alternative approach that still allows for easy debugging. If there is, 
doesn't have to be part of this PR.



-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to