Hi Colin, please find my answers inline:
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 11:35 PM, Colin Alworth niloc...@gmail.com wrote:
I got a tweet from you asking for a donation (or rather a 'partner', which
apparently means 'money'), but couldn't frame a useful response in 140
chars, so since this thread is
Thanks for looking into how to improve Java stack traces. I agree that we
could do a better job. However, there are some problems with your approach:
First of all, we can't guarantee that we will accept this change. That
doesn't seem very fair to whoever might be donating money.
I would like to
I got a tweet from you asking for a donation (or rather a 'partner', which
apparently means 'money'), but couldn't frame a useful response in 140
chars, so since this thread is coming back, I thought to do so here
instead.
What license are you offering these code samples under - if it isn't
Hello folks,
I just wanted to remind everyone that the last day to fund this project is
this Friday, August 23.
I've been using this framework in production in my app now for 2 months,
and it works great. Have logged 70,000 perfect stack traces so far!
Already fixed 3 major bugs in my
because I don't want to spend so much extra time working on something
that people don't really care about.
I'm sure many people, current GWT committers included, care very much
about bug fixes/improvements to the stack trace deobfuscation code.
Unfortunately, I doubt that translates to
I do not think you will get very far trying to ransom your bug fixes.
I get that Kickstarter/etc. is great for new/potential projects, but
you're basically saying well, I already built/fixed this, but crap, it
would have been nice to get paid for it
I can appreciate how it might
Hi Alex,
By the way, who wants to try it? Please get it touch with me (alex
at typeracer.com), and I will email you my patch so you can see for
yourself how awesome it is.
Instead of emailing a patch, how about just uploading it here:
https://gwt-review.googlesource.com/#/
I do not think
On Thursday, July 18, 2013 3:21:59 PM UTC+2, RyanZA wrote:
Jens, even with source maps in Chrome, I've been unable to get stack
traces to work. They still print out poorly in production when an exception
is hit - the exceptions ignore the source maps entirely. I asked previously
if there
That article was the third result in a Google search for gwt web mode
exceptions:
http://www.summa-tech.com/blog/2012/06/11/7-tips-for-exception-handling-in-gwt/
I agree that
http://www.gwtproject.org/doc/latest/DevGuideLogging.html#Remote_Logging needs
to be expanded.
On Thursday, July 18,
What GWT needs here is something closer to what you get with proguard - a
mapping file created during compilation that could be used to run the
obfuscated/javascript exception through a utility to give the correct stack
trace with zero overheads.
I'm not entirely sure on how proguard
In response to some of the concerns expressed in this thread, I'd like to
clarify that by using my patch, you will not be making any trade-offs
versus what you previously had with GWT's old implementation: my patch will
give you all pros and no cons.
Here's why:
There are two ways to get
Do you plan to maintain that code if it is integrated into GWT or will it
be a one time contribution and other people have to wrap their head around
it again if your solution needs to be adjusted?
I ask this because GWT will drop support for IE6/7 relatively soon and
probably by the end of
I certainly applaud the obvious time, effort, and care that you've put
into these improvements, but 45% size and 22-44% execution speed overhead
sounds like a rather painful penalty to pay. I'm not sure that's going to
be worth using in a performance-sensitive application.
If you use
Thanks for all your questions. Here are my answers.
So, something like this has been used at least internally for quite a long
time -- what exactly did you have to change in StackTraceDeobfuscator?
Quite a few things, actually. I go into great detail about that, including
diffs of some
14 matches
Mail list logo
