Sounds like you just want to add a watch to whatever object you're concerned
with.  Maybe add a watch that wont fall out of scope would be interesting?




On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 2:39 PM, Steven Roussey <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> why not just:
>
> globalObj = new MyObject();
> console.log(globalObj);
>
> that is, don't use var.
>
> On Jun 7, 1:54 pm, Alexander Podgorny <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > Ok, I suppose eval will do that. Though, it displays 'undefined' if I
> > run it in the command line, and not the 'Object myprop=hello'.
> > But at least I can refer to 'obj' through command code now. Thanks for
> > the tip.
> >
> > On Jun 7, 9:20 am, johnjbarton <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > No, sorry I still don't get it. You want something different than:
> > > console.log( eval ('var obj = {myprop: "hello" }) );
> > > ?
> > > jjb
> >
> > > On Jun 6, 4:13 pm, Alexander Podgorny <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > > The idea is to be able to refer to the outputted objects through the
> > > > command line.
> > > > So, if in js file I do console.exec('var obj = {myprop: 'hello'}); ,
> > > > the firebug would output: "Object obj", that I can click on.
> > > > So far nothing different from console.log. What is different is this:
> > > > in command line I want to be able to refer to the object "obj" in the
> > > > following manner:>> obj.myprop
> >
> > > > Which would output: "hello".
> >
> > > > Do you see what I mean?
> >
> > > > On Jun 5, 9:29 pm, johnjbarton <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > > > Sorry I don't understand. By "console prompt" do you mean the
> command
> > > > > line on the Console panel?  How is what you want different from
> > > > > console.log()?
> >
> > > > > jjb
> >
> > > > > On Jun 5, 8:54 pm, Alexander Podgorny <
> [email protected]>
> > > > > wrote:
> >
> > > > > > Just a suggestion. It would be nice to be able to execute
> javascript
> > > > > > in firebug, just as it would be executed from console prompt,
> using a
> > > > > > console function.
> >
> > > > > > Reason: often time I want to interact with outputted object in
> firebug
> > > > > > that is otherwise inaccessible (because it is private)
> >
> > > > > > What do you think? Is this a good addition, or perhaps I missed
> > > > > > another, better way to do this?
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Firebug" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/firebug?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to