Well, the Debugger.Object.prototype.class getter shouldn't change, but perhaps devtools shouldn't use it any more. Devtools should be displaying objects in a way that doesn't surprise developers.
It seems to me the ideal behavior would be for Devtools to show objects in the way that the ES6 standard toString methods would display them, and then if those have been modified, attempt to display them as the modifications suggest, to the extent that that can be done safely. On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 9:23 AM, Nick Fitzgerald <nfitzger...@mozilla.com> wrote: > Yes (via the `Debugger.Object.prototype.class` getter) but unless I've > misunderstood the scope of this proposal, the class name exposed by that > getter should not change, only the `Object.prototype.toString.call(thing)` > would change. > > On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 12:18 AM, Panos Astithas <p...@mozilla.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 8:21 PM, Nick Fitzgerald <nfitzger...@mozilla.com > > > > wrote: > > > >> On Fri, Jun 3, 2016 at 8:41 AM, Boris Zbarsky <bzbar...@mit.edu> wrote: > >> > >> > Devtools bug: none so far, but maybe we need one? Does devtools rely > on > >> > the JSClass name or Object.prototype.toString anywhere? > >> > > >> > >> I think we are fine. There are certainly places where we use the > >> `Object.prototype.toString.call(thing) === "[object Whatever]"` hack, > but > >> I don't see any instances that would be tripped up by these changes. > >> > >> > >> > https://dxr.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/search?q=path%3Adevtools+%22toString.call(%22&redirect=false > >> > > > > Don't we still use the JSClass name in the variables view to indicate the > > object type (reflected from Debugger.Object.prototype.class)? > > > > Panos > > > > > _______________________________________________ > dev-platform mailing list > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform > _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
