It probably makes sense to converge on a common string format. However, I agree with some of the previous replies: if the main motivation for standardising stack traces is to make them processable, then we should focus on introducing a structured format.
/Andreas On 12 November 2013 21:33, Oliver Hunt <[email protected]> wrote: > Righto, filed https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=124220 > > —Oliver > > On Nov 12, 2013, at 12:30 PM, Mark Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > > FWIW, the code I linked to, which arv refers to, when it finds itself on SM, > normalizes the SM error stack string to approx v8's format. But the more > important part of the answer is the parsed form provided by getCWStack. > > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 12:20 PM, Oliver Hunt <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Righto, do we know whether Carakan/V8’s text or SM’s text is preferred? >> >> Currently it seems like JSC’s is a little bit weird compare to others, and >> as i’ve said earlier i’m happy to change it to match another engine (we all >> have the same info in varying ways, so we can all technically produce the >> same view in our .stack string) >> >> —Oliver >> >> On Nov 12, 2013, at 11:17 AM, Erik Arvidsson <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Oliver Hunt <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> The only formatting requirement for the stack property is that if it is >>> present, it must be a string. >> >> >> No. There is a lot of code out there that parses this string and depend on >> the format. >> >> >> See Mark's reply for one such case. >> >>> >>> >>> —Oliver >>> >>> On Nov 12, 2013, at 9:23 AM, Erik Arvidsson <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> When I started investigating this I had the hope that stack could be >>> standardized. However, the format of the string is cannot be changed without >>> breaking the web so the way forward is to introduce a new property name. But >>> since we are introducing a new property name we should return structured >>> data instead of a plain old string. >>> >>> I haven't had the time to work on this since my initial analysis of the >>> state of the stack property. >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 7:51 PM, John Barton <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Note that in Chrome the devtools are remote and error.stack is a getter >>>> which issues a remote method call to the backend. Only when the stack >>>> property is accessed will the internal representation be converted to a >>>> string. Anything else is too expensive. >>>> >>>> A plain JS object format would be much more useful for development tools >>>> developers. >>>> >>>> jjb >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> es-discuss mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> erik >>> _______________________________________________ >>> es-discuss mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> erik >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> es-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >> > > > > -- > Text by me above is hereby placed in the public domain > > Cheers, > --MarkM > > > > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
