[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [Dltk-dev] any objections to changing the "toString" of the CollectionType?
|
really?
My collections (i am talking here about collections, what most (java)script things are) are not shown like that at my place.
They show exactly how [xxx,yyy] at my place.
I made the output like this:
Array[8]{xx,yy,zzz}
zo it has your Array[size] and a limited preview of what is inside. Its way easier for users to see at first glance whats in it
If you have to collapse it to see it then it takes 8 lines of the variable view which is in my eyes horrible. Waste of UI space.
johan
On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 1:52 PM, Jae Gangemi <
jgangemi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
that 'number[8]' is supposed to work like the java debugger where if you have an aray you see something like char[5] which tells you that it's a character array and it has a size of 5.
so in this case, you have an array of numbers w/ a size of 8.
looking at the type of the first element for a script array may not make sense b/c they can be heterogenous.
i'd like the behavior to remain consistent w/ how the java debugger works (if possible), where the details pane shows the 'expanded' values, while the collapsed array (and/or hash) continues to show at 'somthing[size]'. i was going to work on a way to override what gets displayed in the details pane if you don't have a detail formatter setup next or the debugger engine doesn't support evaluations.
the implemenation below would end up in a method like 'formatDetailView' or something along those lines.
Now we get something like this in the debugger:
"number[8]"
What does that say? Nobody can see whats really in it without really expanding it and so on
The Rhino debugger (the old one) did this:
"Array(10.0,200.0,30.0,40.0,5006.0,700.0,200.0,"johan")"
Of course not the complete array values limit it (currently 100 values)
This is the code:
public String formatValue(IScriptValue value) {
StringBuffer sb = new StringBuffer();
sb.append(value.getRawValue()); // == Array
sb.append("("); // == Array
try {
IVariable[] variables2 = value.getVariables();
if (variables2.length > 0) {
int length = variables2.length;
length = length > 100 ? 100 : length;
for (int i = 0; i < variables2.length; i++) {
sb.append(variables2[i].getValue().getValueString());
sb.append(",");
}
sb.setLength(sb.length() - 1);
}
} catch (DebugException ex) {
ex.printStackTrace();
}
sb.append(")"); // == Array
addInstanceId(value, sb);
return sb.toString();
}
Should i commit this? Or are you guys liking the current behavior better?
johan
--
-jae
_______________________________________________
dltk-dev mailing list
dltk-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dltk-dev
