Any site you use Firebug on will show errors. What you say for the net panel applies equally to the console and script panels: if you load page with Firebug off, then open Firebug, you will need to reload to see the Firebug content for these panels.
In 1.4 the phrase "...panel is enable for a domain..." won't apply. The panel enablement will be independent of the domain. But your overall concern, that the error count feature of Firebug will be largely broken, is quite correct. However, the feature is already broken because Firefox's support of error reporting is broken. The page of the errors are not identified by Firefox (nsIConsoleService), I suppose because it was designed before tab browsing and AJAX. Firebug tries to work around this problem by comparing the error URLs to URLS for pages it tracks. But of course if it is not tracking a page, it has nothing to compare to. With some extra work we could present the total error counts seen by Firefox and reset this number every time the Firefox location changes. For simple cases this will be accurate, but if you have multiple tabs of AJAX sites open, the numbers will be too high. That leaves us with unhappy users even if we spend time to implement this function. Either way we can't win, so I'm inclined to put my work towards features with more upside. jjb On Mar 29, 2:24 pm, alfonsoml <[email protected]> wrote: > If I have choose to install Firebug and enable the console and script > panel for some domains, I guess that it should be a safe bet that I'm > interested about any errors in those pages, even if they mean some > extra overhead for the pages that I'm working on. > I can understand for example that in order to get correct data in the > net panel I might need to first show that panel and then reload the > page, but always showing the errors in the status bar, as long as the > console and script panel is enabled for a domain, seems basic > features. > > On 29 mar, 19:52, johnjbarton <[email protected]> wrote: > > > We could report errors in the status bar, but not without adding > > overhead to every page load. > > jjb > > > On Mar 29, 5:23 am, alfonsoml <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I think that the "autodisable" of firebug will bring lots of reports > > > about broken functionality. > > > Since the very beginning of firebug I was able to set the domains that > > > I'm working on, and without the need to keep firebug open I was able > > > to quickly see any javascript error in the status bar. At that moment > > > I open Firebug and check what's the error and start the debugging. > > > Now I'm finding myself that sometimes a page doesn't work, but I don't > > > see any warning, so I fire up IE8 and it quickly shows a dialog > > > informing of the problem and the ability to debug it. Even using the > > > most basic installation of IE6 anyone is able to see the exclamation > > > icon in the status bar informing of the error. > > > > On 26 mar, 02:56, John J Barton <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I just finished a blog post about the new enablement approach in > > > > Firebug 1.4,http://blog.getfirebug.com/?p=124 > > > > > 1.4a14 has this new approach implemented and we'd be interested in > > > > feedback.http://getfirebug.com/releases > > > > > jjb --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Firebug" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/firebug?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
