I _think_ I understand how we are talking past each other:
I want to remove the <debug> tag, because it gives the illusion that
it is creating a view on the canvas, when it really is not. Consider
the DHTML debugger.
The <debug> tag does not make a debugger. All it does is set
debugger prefs. My question is: is there some pref that you need to
make your examples work? Or are you thinking that if I remove the
<debug> tag, you will not be able to use Debug.write and Debug.format
in examples?
If you just want a way to have an example that does the equivalent of
Debug.write, or Debug.format, and does it trivially, you just want
some equivalent of `stdout`. You don't need the whole debugger for
that. In fact, you probably don't want the debugger, since the
debugger in DHTML is completely different (runs in its own iframe,
not as a window on the app canvas).
So, really what we need (and something I want to do) is to just have
a simple component that is a window you can print to. I have a task
to move formatted output out of the debugger so that it is generally
available, and if you link that with a window, I think you would be
all set. But, it might be cool to replace <debug> with something like:
<window name="output" \>
And them be able to say:
output.format("Hello %s!\", "World");
On 2007-03-16, at 08:02 EDT, John Sundman wrote:
A rare instance of Tucker and John talking past each other. There
is no reason to keep the tag, long term. It's just that before it
goes away I will have to change all the examples that depend on
it. They may not work nicely now, but they work. If the tag is
removed from the the compiler's knowledge, they will not compile,
which would be worse. Please, be my guest -- do away with the
tag. Just tell me how I should code the examples instead, and give
me a little time to do it.
jrs
On Mar 15, 2007, at 11:29 PM, P T Withington wrote:
You didn't answer my question. By default, the debugger auto-
sizes itself to the bottom 1/2 of the canvas. If you use the
debug tag to give it an explicit size or position and then change
the canvas size, you have to remember to update the debug tag or
you may find the debugger partly (or completely) off the canvas.
I am looking for a reason to keep the debug tag.
On 2007-03-15, at 20:45 EDT, John Sundman wrote:
It's just a matter of making sure my examples don't break.
You use the debugger to debug. I use it as a pedagogical device.
jrs
On Mar 15, 2007, at 8:32 PM, P T Withington wrote:
Why? What do you need it for? If you leave it out, do you not
get a decent default (by default the debugger is in the bottom
1/2 of the canvas)? I find that 99% of the time I am better off
without it.
On 2007-03-15, at 20:13 EDT, John Sundman wrote:
That's fine with me, so long as we give people enough advanced
notice. I use the <debug> tag in many many examples in the docs.
jrs
On Mar 15, 2007, at 6:10 PM, P T Withington wrote:
Ah. Or, we could eliminate the <debug> tag and only have
console debugging, instead of inline debugging.
On 2007-03-15, at 17:58 EDT, Jim Grandy wrote:
A fuller answer is that we now document special forms
separately from classes. The 'Debug' class *is* documented in
the reference guide, but we need to add an entry for the
<debug> special canvas element.
On Mar 15, 2007, at 2:52 PM, Jim Grandy wrote:
There was no documentation in the schema next to that entry,
so I think I didn't notice it when I was extracting
documentable special forms.
I'll add it.
jim
On Mar 15, 2007, at 2:43 PM, P T Withington wrote:
There used to be an entry, did it disappear?
http://www.openlaszlo.org/lps/docs/reference/debug.html
On 2007-03-15, at 14:52 EDT, Jim Grandy wrote:
It's quite possible to add an entry for the 'debug' tag in
the refguide, but I'd rather wait until 4.0.1. Will you
file a bug with pointers to relevant information?
jim
On Mar 15, 2007, at 11:28 AM, P T Withington wrote:
Well, there's some doc in the change note you may want to
incorporate... The <debug> tag is one of those 'special
forms', that have to be documented somehow. Actually,
IWBNI we could just eliminate it in both runtimes. But
that's for another day.
On 2007-03-15, at 14:23 EDT, John Sundman wrote:
approved. OR were you just informing? Well, approved
anyway.
jrs
On Mar 15, 2007, at 12:56 PM, P T Withington wrote:
Change 20070315-ptw-J by [EMAIL PROTECTED] on
2007-03-15 12:49:29 EDT
in /Users/ptw/OpenLaszlo/legals-1
for http://svn.openlaszlo.org/openlaszlo/branches/
legals
Summary: Don't generate empty debugger view in DHTML
Bugs Fixed:
LPP-3707 'canvas layouts and debug tag collide'
Technical Reviewer: hminsky (pending)
QA Reviewer: mdavis (pending)
Doc Reviewer: jsundman (pending)
Documentation:
In DHTML, the debugger appears as a separate HTML
frame, rather than
in-line in the application. As a consequence the
<debug> tag does not
actually control the size of the debugger frame.
Release Notes:
Details:
DebugCompiler: Ignore the <debug> tag in DHTML
debugger/library.lzx: Only for swf
Tests:
Mark's test case
Files:
M WEB-INF/lps/server/src/org/openlaszlo/compiler/
DebugCompiler.java
M lps/components/debugger/library.lzx
Changeset: http://svn.openlaszlo.org/openlaszlo/patches/
20070315-ptw-J.tar
