Re: [Dltk-dev] any objections to changing the "toString" of the Collecti

["Johan Compagner" <jcompagner@xxxxxxxxx>]

yeah for ruby the [size] is a bit strange looking if you have first [...] in front of it.
Maybe sb.append(value.getRawValue()); is not a good idea to have default?
I can live with just
sb.append("Array"); 
?
johan

On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 2:19 PM, Alex Panchenko <alex@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I like the idea to display some of the array elements, but the basic implementation should have some options how to display values.
e.g. now in ruby array is displayed as

[...][3]{1,2,3} (id = 23638800)

Strange, isn't it?

So my intention is that basic implementation should be generally usable and language specifics should be added via inheritance or parameters passed in the constructor.

Alex

Jae Gangemi 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.

On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 6:10 AM, Johan Compagner <jcompagner@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:jcompagner@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

   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


   _______________________________________________
   dltk-dev mailing list

   dltk-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:dltk-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

   https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dltk-dev




--
-jae

------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
dltk-dev mailing list
dltk-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dltk-dev
 

_______________________________________________
dltk-dev mailing list
dltk-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dltk-dev