2011/5/2 Arian Stolwijk <[email protected]>
> Another pretty nice console wrapper is: https://github.com/amadeus/dbg
>
>
> On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 1:53 AM, Barry van Oudtshoorn <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I have a console wrapper that I've shared here before, if you're
>> interested -- http://jsfiddle.net/yx5a9/5/ .
>>
>> For the record, my check is: |if (window.console && console[type] &&
>> console[type].apply) { ... }|. I've shared it here before, but its big
>> advantage is that it has a toString method; elsewhere, I've bound an
>> application alert to [Ctrl]+[Shift]+[`] that shows the results of toString.
>> It makes debugging in IE infinitely simpler. :)
>>
>
I like 'em! But... it's circumventing the question in a very nice way. (If
I'd been of the female persuasion, I might have said something along the
lines of 'you boys are sweet.') Guess I wasn't asking the question
correctly.
First half of my OP is crystal, given the whos' been answering: nope,
mootools core doesn't have something like that. We have a way, though!
Now let's rephrase the second half of the OP:
Is it 'a commonly known fact' that console.log and friends aren't real
_functions_ in IE9/IE8 (I checked: 9.08080 / 8.0.7600) and 'thus' do _not_
offer the .apply() method, while all the other major browsers out there /do/
present them as functions, so you can console.log.apply() there to your
heart's content?
Apparently, given these wrappers, the answer is a definite 'yes', but where
the heck is this observation documented?
That's the 64K question, because I can't find it! Am I blind?
(Sure, there's nothing in the JS spec docs about console, so nothing is
/wrong/, per se, it's just I can't find them in a quirks comparison chart or
doc sheet anywhere, and this is spooky.)
I like the 'console[type]' way of writing the check in Barry's case, but
both 'wrappers' basically take a detour around IE console.log -- once you
realize what you're looking at/for -- and offer one another way to view
these info streams, more or less completely ignoring the existence of IE's
console.log as:
if (console && console['log'] && console['log'].apply)
{
console.log('yep!');
}
else
{
console.log('FAIL'); // sic!
}
in a IE8/9 console gives you:
LOG: FAIL
Nothing wrong with those wrappers, they're absolutely fine and each in their
own way way better than my bangings on keyboards, but my encounter with IE
here feels way too much like sitting behind a workstation again, invisible
BOFH in attendance, a Real Man's UNIX at your fingertips and then those
_lovely_ manpages. ('apropos'?! Never heard of it. That's for wussies.
'gnu'?! We're running a business here, not a wildlife preservation area!)
Maybe it's me not being a native English speaker, but those manpages always
were absolutely, perfectly and concisely _exact_ and _correct_ in their
description of the tools involved. _After_ the fact. Because at the time of
despair those were of absolutely no help whatsoever when you didn't already
know what to do anyhow. This console.log thingy and my google fu gone
utterly AWOL feels the same: you either know it, or you don't. Members only.
Ain't got the tie? Too bad, son, maybe in another life.
(I do recall a time when two aboriginal shamans were sitting there in the
room with me, coffee at the ready in their paws, waiting for me to nuke
myself, their AIX, most probably both, to Kingdom Come in a jiffy. We were
very friendly and the atmosphere was that of a room full of friends watching
some important racing event in expectation of some seriously spectacular
crashes, with extra replay done John Woo style, but this here was the
consultant acid test whether I was Man or Boy and they had already
transgressed by telling me the VT there had the wrong TERM (termcap) config,
so how did I want to edit this here file with vi? Luckily I remembered from
the dregs of my festering brainbox that you don't get cursor keys then but
you still have cursor keys... if you know where to find them in the
alphanumerics. ;-) I passed the test and all were merry after that, and
this IE+google fail thing feels similar, only on a google/Net level now. So
I'm rather interested in having a look at those manual pages now, assuming I
passed. Or is IE the Redmond technological equivalent of selfdiscovery?)
BTW: Another fun observation I ran into several months ago on my way to
attain 'able' rating, according to my own opinion at least, when it comes to
JS coding:
- start IE8.
- F12
- type this in the console window (do NOT press that 'start debugging'
button yet!):
if (console) { console.log('oy!'); }
and you get:
(X) error: console is "undefined"
- hit the 'start debugging' button and try the same:
'oy!'
The correct answer there was, of course, to check like this:
if (typeof console !== 'undefined')
but the funny bit was that IE8 doesn't have an active 'console' until you've
'start debugging', or told it to go and debug the failure in your script in
some web page. After that, the console doesn't go away.
Ran into it because I had copy-pasted some guru code which had the 'if
(console)' in there. My conclusion: the guru was a baboon like me, only with
page ranking off the charts.
That was another one of those; blamed it on my n00bness at the time; this
time around, I don't want to rate myself n00b, while probably I am.
--
Met vriendelijke groeten / Best regards,
Ger Hobbelt
--------------------------------------------------
web: http://www.hobbelt.com/
http://www.hebbut.net/
mail: [email protected]
mobile: +31-6-11 120 978
--------------------------------------------------
