I've mentioned your request now at bug 1164882 comment 2
<https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1164882#c2>.
On Friday, November 27, 2015 at 10:41:23 PM UTC+1, San wrote:
>
> Unfortunately using breakpoints in that way would be far too slow -- it's
> an "overloaded" variadic function that's called a number of times in rapid
> succession, each time with a different number of arguments of differing
> types. What I like about the pure-Console approach (like Function Logging)
> is that all the calls and arguments flow down in rapid, near-real-time
> fashion. (BTW, I know there's technically no such thing as an "overloaded
> function" in JS, but you probably know what I mean.)
>
> I just tried something else, very simple. Within the function body, I put
> this:
>
> console.log( arguments );
>
> Interestingly, this gives me both more and less information than Function
> Logging. On the downside, it doesn't show the *name* of each parameter;
> but on the upside, it shows what the *value* of some of the parameters
> are. An actual example, for a single iteration of the function call, should
> make this clear...
>
> Here's what Firebug's Function Logging shows:
>
> waitForElm(elmTrigger="textCol", actionToExecute=Object { type="object"},
> arrayOrSrc=Object { type="object"}, bg=undefined)
>
> For the exact same call, here's what using *console.log(arguments)* shows:
>
> ["textCol", setupAnimToggle(animID, animSrc, posterFrame, animSwitch,
> offCaption, onCaption, initialState), ["mastheadAnim",
> "EssayMasthead.anim.gif", "EssayMasthead.posterFrame.gif", 4 more...]]
>
> In addition to not showing the parameter name (e.g. Logging's
> *elmTrigger="textCol"* is better than just *"textCol"*) this has a few
> other shortcomings:
>
> 1. It jumbles all the parameters together, rather than listing them
> vertically as #0, #1, #2, etc, which would be much clearer.
>
When you click the array bracket, you'll switch to the DOM panel, where you
can see them listed vertically.
> 2. It doesn't give the parameter types. Some are obviously strings, and
> (for example) I happen to know that "setupAnimToggle" is a function, and
> that its arguments came in from an array via 'function.apply', but this
> listing doesn't indicate any of that.
>
It's relatively easy to see that the setupAnimToggle parameter is a
function, because it has parameter brackets and is displayed green in
normal font weight like other functions within the DOM panel and described
within the wiki
<https://getfirebug.com/wiki/index.php/DOM_Panel#Color_Codes>.
Whether a function was called normally or with a different this value (i.e.
function.apply(), function.call() or function.bind()) is a good idea. You
may want to add this info to bug 1164882.
3. For some reason it doesn't give the complete list, truncating it to "4
> more...". (Playing around, I discovered that I can get to the full list
> with 2 more clicks, which takes me to the DOM tab, and then I can manually
> switch back to the Console tab -- OK but not ideal. Why does it truncate
> the list of parameters?)
>
It truncates the list of parameters to reduce memory usage. You can adjust
the value via the extensions.firebug.ObjectShortIteratorMax
<https://getfirebug.com/wiki/index.php/Firebug_Preferences#ObjectShortIteratorMax>
preference.
> Perhaps there's some expansion or variation on console.log(arguments)
> that would deal with some of these shortcomings? Some custom console
> function that would combine the best features of Function Logging with
> console.log(arguments)? Either approach (or combining the two, which I'm
> doing right now but is rather cluttered) seems incomplete, but still
> better than slogging through breakpoints. However, perhaps someone has an
> idea for a custom function (to be nested within the real function inside of
> a console.log) that would give a more complete readout?
>
As far as I know within the function you just have access to the argument
values but not their names. See a related Stack Overflow thread
<http://stackoverflow.com/q/3404057/432681>.
Maybe you could do some hacks with Reflect
<https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Reflect>
or Proxy
<https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Proxy>,
though I didn't try anything in that direction.
Because upcoming versions of Firebug will only be a theme for the Firefox
built-in DevTools, you should first check if they already have the feature
you want. And if not, you should file an enhancement request for them
<https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Firefox>.
Sebastian
On Friday, November 27, 2015 at 6:50:27 AM UTC-5, Sebastian Zartner wrote:
>
> There is no way I know of to change the logging.
> The easiest way to find out about the passed arguments is to set a
> breakpoint within the function and while the execution is stopped at it
> investigate the arguments via the *Watch* side panel
> <https://getfirebug.com/wiki/index.php/Watch_Side_Panel>.
>
> As Firebug 3 will be based on the DevTools, you may also want to follow bug
> 1164882 <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1164882>, which
> targets to implement the logging of function calls for the DevTools.
>
> Sebastian
>
> On 27 November 2015 at 01:10, Lawrence San <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> When I right-click a function in Firebug's Script tab, and tell it to log
>> a function, it gives me useful feedback in the Console. However, the way it
>> shows the arguments is not as specific as I'd like.
>>
>> If an incoming argument is a string, it shows me the actual string, which
>> is fine.
>>
>> However, if an incoming argument is a function name, I'd expect it to
>> show me the function name. Instead, it just reports Object { type="object"
>> }, which is true but not very helpful.
>>
>> If the incoming argument is an array, I'd like it to show me the name of
>> the variable that was actually passed (which contains the array), or maybe
>> some other information about the array. Something like "array, length=5"
>> would be good. Instead, it just reports Object { type="object" }, exactly
>> the same as it does for the function, which (again) is true but not very
>> helpful. So I can't even tell whether the argument is a function, or an
>> array, or some other kind of object.
>>
>> Is there some way to change what Function Logging does, to make it more
>> descriptive? If that's not possible, what would be the easiest way (in the
>> Console) for me to ask to see detailed information about all the arguments
>> passed in to the function?
>>
>> Thanks much!
>>
>> --
>> Lawrence San
>> Business Writing: Santhology.com
>> Cartoon Stories for Thoughtful People: Sanstudio.com
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Firebug" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to [email protected].
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/firebug.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/firebug/CAMoMLKjoWBe5zGZo%2BBFq0md7uXV%3DABO9jkrUK3gqjPHNCAuG5Q%40mail.gmail.com
>>
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/firebug/CAMoMLKjoWBe5zGZo%2BBFq0md7uXV%3DABO9jkrUK3gqjPHNCAuG5Q%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Firebug" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/firebug.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/firebug/d0a653ce-e6be-4b82-bb34-a99aed4b5092%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
