I see that Tom Schindl filed the Enhancement request.
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8228357
-- Kevin
On 7/17/2019 11:08 PM, Tom Eugelink wrote:
Hm. Being able to just debug JavaFX will seriously lower the threshold
for people to get on board. Personally if I run into a library that is
behaving faulty and I need to download and compile it first, I'm
already not very happy (it's a hassle). But ahm... cygwin, visual
studio, directshow header files (on windows) is not "just type gradle".
On 18-7-2019 06:45, Robert Lichtenberger wrote:
Thanks for the information. Maybe something in my setup was wrong.
I'd also
appreciate if the default builds would contain debug information, this
would make JavaFX much more "developer friendly".
Robert
Am Do., 18. Juli 2019 um 00:04 Uhr schrieb Kevin Rushforth <
kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com>:
I did a quick test and the difference in size is noticeable, but not
huge -- on the order of 10% larger with the local symbols. You could
file an enhancement to have a binary available with the local symbols
(or to add them to the default build), but I don't know whether it's
generally useful enough to justify it. Maybe Johan can weigh in on this
one?
-- Kevin
On 7/17/2019 1:50 PM, Tom Eugelink wrote:
I think I saw that one of the argument for not providing debug symbols
was size... If there is anything I would not quickly compromise on
nowadays is size. Even my smartwatch has gigabytes of internal
storage. If size is an issue for an application, it is usually not
caused by including debug symbols in a jar.
On 17-7-2019 21:01, Tom Schindl wrote:
Well the main problem is that if there are no local var you can
not set
conditional break points in the code, inject syserr logging to
understand what is going on and what your code does to FX.
One could provide 2 artifacts one with and one without debug symbols.
Tom
On 17.07.19 19:12, Kevin Rushforth wrote:
Mainly size. Generally if a developer is going to debug JavaFX to
point
of wanting to look at local variables, it doesn't seem a stretch for
them to build JavaFX.
-- Kevin
On 7/17/2019 9:57 AM, Tom Schindl wrote:
so what is the reason to strip them (i guess it it size) it is
extremely
painful to don't see local-variables, have parameter names,
arg1,arg2,
... .
Tom
On 17.07.19 17:01, Kevin Rushforth wrote:
When you say that don't see a problem, what exactly do you mean?
If you
are able to see the local variables in a production build, then
that
would in fact be surprising. The production builds, including EA
builds,
should be being built with "-PCONF=Release" which would exclude
vars.
Someone from Gluon should confirm.
-- Kevin
On 7/17/2019 7:56 AM, Michael Paus wrote:
Hi,
I don't see any problem of that kind with Eclipse, on MacOS,
JavaFX
13-ea 9 via Maven.
Michael
Am 17.07.19 um 16:45 schrieb Kevin Rushforth:
That should have been enough to enable local variable
symbols. We
have the following logic for JavaCompile tasks:
compile.options.debugOptions.debugLevel = IS_DEBUG_JAVA ?
"source,lines,vars" : "source,lines"
IS_DEBUG_JAVA is true if CONF is either Debug or DebugNative.
Maybe something else is stripping out the symbols.
Has anyone else debugged JavaFX recently and tried to look at
local
vars? If not, I'll take a quick look later today.
-- Kevin
On 7/17/2019 7:38 AM, Robert Lichtenberger wrote:
I'm trying to get to the bottom of some weird layout problems
in my
application.
To that end I want/need to debug JavaFX classes.
But when I step into JavaFX classes I don't see local
variables or
parameter names.
So I thought debug symbols are probably stripped from the
official
builds.
I rolled my own and tried
CONF = Debug
and
CONF = DebugNative
in gradle.properties, recompiled OpenJFX and integrated the
libraries
into a little eclipse testproject.
But I still don't see parameter names or local variables.
Is there something else I need to do in order to see them?
Best regards,
Robert
