Good catch.  I'll fix before I check in.  (I reversed the sense of a lot of 
these checks to only set readable when I could _prove_ readable, rather than to 
unset it when it seemed it wasn't going to be readable.  Hence, it will be much 
more accurate.  If I get the logic right!)

On 2009-12-01, at 11:08, Henry Minsky wrote:

> Oh, one question, about this comment
> 
>      // If the debug name starts with '#' (indicating that it is a
>        // global ID), turn isreadable on
>        if (debug_name.charAt(0) != '#') {
>          // TODO: Verify that the global value of debug_name is thing
>          isreadable = true;
>        }
> 
> The sense of the comment seems backwards to the sense of the comparison?
> 
> 
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 10:42 AM, P T Withington <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> Can you review this?  It makes it so your swf10 backtraces can be inspected
>> and legible.  Try causing a runtime error and then do .getStackTrace() on
>> the error object.  If you inspect the abbreviated string, it prints out
>> nicely.
>> 
>> Change 20091124-ptw-p by [email protected] on 2009-11-24 19:18:55 EST
>>   in /Users/ptw/OpenLaszlo/trunk-2
>>   for http://svn.openlaszlo.org/openlaszlo/trunk
>> 
>> Summary: Learn how to inspect long strings again
>> 
>> Bugs Fixed: LPP-8635 Debug.inspect lost the ability to expand abbreviated
>> strings
>> 
>> Technical Reviewer: hminsky (pending)
>> 
>> Overview:
>> 
>>   Rename the __String parameters `pretty` and `unique` to what they
>>   really do: `escape` (i.e., make non-printing characters in strings
>>   show up) and `readable` (i.e., if you can't return a
>>   representation that eval would say is === to the original, use the
>>   stylized debug representation <<type #uid | description>> to
>>   indicate so).
>> 
>> Details:
>> 
>>   swf9stubs, LzMessage, LzDebug.{js,as}, LzFormatter: Update
>>   parameter names.
>> 
>>   LzDebug: Update parameter names and documentation for __String and
>>   __StringDescription.  Change the return contract of
>>   __StringDescription to say whether or not the representation
>>   created is 'readable' or not.  Be more accurate about what is
>>   readable.  For string-like, only escaped, primitive strings that
>>   have not been truncated qualify.  Remove a lot of hairy inspection
>>   that was trying (but incorrectly) computing readable.  Don't enter
>>   non-objects into the circular reference table.  Make the decision
>>   as to when to used "unreadable" representations sane.  When
>>   inspecting non-objects, turn off length limit, escape, and
>>   readable, so you see the full content.
>> 
>> Tests:
>>   Create a program that causes a runtime error, e.g.:
>> 
>>     (function (x) { return x.foo })(3);
>> 
>>   Run in swf10.  Inspect the error.  In the Debugger, evaluate
>> 
>>     _.getStackTrace()
>> 
>>   You will get an abbreviated string like:
>> 
>>     «string(1838)| ReferenceError: Error #1069: P?»
>> 
>>   Inspect that, and you should see the expanded string, which is the
>>   backtrace from the runtime:
>> 
>>     lzx> Debug.inspect(«string(1838)| ReferenceError: Error #1069: P?»)
>>     ReferenceError: Error #1069: Property foo not found on Number and
>> there is no default value.
>>             at
>> <anonymous>()[/usr/local/tomcat/jakarta-tomcat-5.0.30/temp/lzswf9/Users/ptw/OpenLaszlo/trunk-2/test/build/ptw/$lzc$class_$2Fcanvas$2Fa.as:69]
>>             at
>> $lzc$class_$2Fcanvas$2Fa/foo()[/usr/local/tomcat/jakarta-tomcat-5.0.30/temp/lzswf9/Users/ptw/OpenLaszlo/trunk-2/test/build/ptw/$lzc$class_$2Fcanvas$2Fa.as:82]
>>     [...]
>> 
>> Files:
>> M      WEB-INF/lps/lfc/debugger/swf9stubs.lzs
>> M      WEB-INF/lps/lfc/debugger/LzMessage.lzs
>> M      WEB-INF/lps/lfc/debugger/LzDebug.lzs
>> M      WEB-INF/lps/lfc/debugger/platform/dhtml/LzDebug.js
>> M      WEB-INF/lps/lfc/debugger/platform/swf9/LzDebug.as
>> M      WEB-INF/lps/lfc/compiler/LzFormatter.lzs
>> 
>> 
>> Changeset: http://svn.openlaszlo.org/openlaszlo/patches/20091124-ptw-p.tar
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Henry Minsky
> Software Architect
> [email protected]


_______________________________________________
Laszlo-reviews mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-reviews

Reply via email to