On Mar 5, 12:37 pm, Kris Zyp <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mar 4, 5:29 am, Norris Boyd <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Feb 27, 8:19 am, Kris Zyp <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Oct 8 2008, 6:15 am, Kris Zyp <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > What is the best way to get the AST representation > > > > (org.mozilla.javascript.Node or appropriate subclass) of an existing > > > > function (one that was created by evaluation)? Currently I am calling > > > > JS toString for the function and then creating a new Parser and > > > > parsing that string, but seems pretty awkward. Is there a better way? > > > > Will 1.7R2 with it's new AST API provide any assistance in getting at > > > the AST of a function from a live function instance? > > > > Thanks, > > > Kris > > > 1.7R2 doesn't have the new AST API. That feature is still being > > developed and is targeted at 1.7R3. > > Sorry, that was a typo, I knew it was R3. > > > There are currently no plans to retain the AST after compilation, > > since to do so would likely result in a substantial memory cost. > > Clearly the memory cost would prohibit this from being the default > behavior, but couldn't this be a configuration option? It seems like > the new AST API would have much broader opportunities for use if it > could be accessed from within JavaScript by accessing the AST from a > live function. > For example, I could get parameter names: > > function add(a, b){ > return a + b;} > > foo.ast.getParams().get(0).getName() -> "a" > > Wouldn't that be cool! Would it be better to talk to Steve about this? > Kris
+1 It would be a shame not to have the option to access this information at runtime. _______________________________________________ dev-tech-js-engine-rhino mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-js-engine-rhino
