Yes.
I'll still use your test case to see if I can get the error location
correct.
On 2009-09-28, at 17:01, André Bargull wrote:
> But we can close LPP-8151 nevertheless, can't we?
>
>
> On 9/28/2009 10:26 PM, P T Withington wrote:
>> I'm going to re-open LPP-8479 for this. I agree, this is too much
>> loss of information.
>> On 2009-09-28, at 13:56, André Bargull wrote:
>>> I was more concerned about the "too simplistic heuristic", because
>>> an error message pointing to LaszloEvents.lzs won't help users
>>> that much. Therefore I think we need to swallow the bitter pill
>>> and take your brute force fix..
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/28/2009 6:49 PM, P T Withington wrote:
>>>> On 2009-09-28, at 12:33, André Bargull wrote:
>>>>> I've just made a simple testcase to verify that LPP-8151 can be
>>>>> closed:
>>>>> ---
>>>>> <canvas debug="true">
>>>>> <handler name="oninit">
>>>>> if (void 0 instanceof String) {}
>>>>> </handler>
>>>>> </canvas>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> The debugger intercepted the runtime error, but the file and
>>>>> line information aren't really accurate:
>>>>> ---
>>>>> ERROR @events/LaszloEvents.lzs#513: TypeError: Error #1010: A
>>>>> term is undefined and has no properties.
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> This could lead to some confusion and make it a bit difficult to
>>>>> find the error in the source code. Should we worry about this?
>>>> Yes we should, but probably as an improvement (or 2).
>>>> I see two bugs here:
>>>> 1) We need a way to warn the user when the file/line number
>>>> information is inaccurate. See
>>>> (http://jira.openlaszlo.org/jira/browse/LPP-7443
>>>> ), (http://jira.openlaszlo.org/jira/browse/LPP-7176).
>>>> Maybe the debugger should say "@events/LaszloEvents.lzs≈513"
>>>> when it knows the line number is only approximate (i.e., when
>>>> backtrace is not on).
>>>> 2) The heuristic for deciding when to wrap a function body with
>>>> an error catcher is too simplistic. This is why the error is
>>>> being caught in LaszloEvents, instead of the user code. A brute
>>>> force fix for this would be to make this change:
>>>>> Index: JavascriptGenerator.java
>>>>> =
>>>>> ==================================================================
>>>>> --- JavascriptGenerator.java (revision 14885)
>>>>> +++ JavascriptGenerator.java (working copy)
>>>>> @@ -1295,7 +1295,7 @@
>>>>> // variable analysis shows that there is a dereference in the
>>>>> // original body of the function, or we are recording a
>>>>> declared
>>>>> // exception
>>>>> - if ((analyzer.dereferenced && (catchExceptions ||
>>>>> debugExceptions)) || throwExceptions) {
>>>>> + if ((analyzer.dereferenced && catchExceptions) ||
>>>>> debugExceptions || throwExceptions) {
>>>>> String fragment = "";
>>>>> if (throwExceptions) {
>>>>> // Just record declared errors and always rethrow
>>>> Maybe the overhead of doing that is worth the improvement in
>>>> accuracy to at least the file name?
_______________________________________________
Laszlo-reviews mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-reviews
