2014-12-26 13:18 GMT+01:00 Tudor Girba <[email protected]>:

> Hi,
>
> I think there must be a misunderstanding.
>
> There can be a good reason for having a basic inspector around, but I
> think the reason is not because people cannot choose what to use.
>
> There is a toggle to enable/disable the GTInspector. But, even without it,
> the main feature of the GTInspector is exactly to be extended the way
> people want and not impose a fixed way. This is completely different from
> what existed before. In fact, half a year ago there was no problem that
> people could neither choose nor extend anything. In the meantime, we can
> extend our workflows significantly. Adding the various flavors of browsing
> objects is perhaps a couple of lines long and each of us can tweak it
> because there is no higher entity that should decide anymore.
>
> What I cannot quite grasp is that while we pride ourselves with working on
> a reflective language, when we have reflective tools, we seem to not be
> able to  take half an hour to build the tool that fits our needs. I am
> still wondering what is needed to improve this. I think that it's a problem
> of exercise or of communication, but it seems that just providing the
> examples that I linked before is not enough and most people look at the
> inspector still as a black box tool. I will try to work on a tutorial to
> see if it gets better, but do you find the moldability proposition not
> valuable or just unclear?
>

I think this is pretty clear and we have already many examples on how to
extend the inspector (marcus made some great addition for the compiled
method  view (source code / bytecde / block scope trees)

I don't think "inspector as a black box tool" is the problem, eye inspector
has this possibility and there were already some "special" views used.

But sometimes I just want one tool to inspect or explore an object, without
multiple scrolling pages, maybe I am just used to it.




>
> But, as I said, there can still be a valid reason to enable a basic
> inspector that relies on a minimal of libraries (so, definitely not the
> Spec one) for the same reason we have an emergency debugger.
>
> Cheers,
> Doru
>
>
>

Reply via email to