> On Feb 5, 2019, at 10:02 AM, Gerry Sweeney <gezz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello Caitlin,
>
> First of all, thank you for your response, and yes you are right I should
> have been far clearer in my question, please let me clarify.
>
> I have a process, is an x64 C++ application that normally runs as a Windows
> service or a Linux Deamon, its job is to provide a way for our user to write
> application logic in JavaScript, which we then invoke using a REST type API.
> Under normal circumstances, this project runs as a service, but when working
> on the code, it's essentially running as a Windows console application,
> anything emitted on stdout appears in the console window of the running
> process. The process is conceptually similar to a Node.js server process.
>
> This process is written in C++ and embeds V8, and in the current model, we
> create an Isolate and Context per API request made, and when we process a
> request, we are loading some JavaScript from a cache and executing it. As
> part of the embedding, we have created a number of native objects in C++ that
> are exposed in the JavaScript domain, classes that provide access to the
> underlying database, memory cache and other relates to web services.
>
> When we write JavaScript we have to debug it, and in the absence of using CDT
> for remote debugging (which we are in the process of implementing), we could
> at least do with using console.log(). We have implemented a websocket
> interface that on a call by call basis allows our C++ code to send arbitrary
> content back to the developer (of the JavaScript) workstation.
>
> So I need a way of implementing console.log() where I can redirect its output
> to my own websocket. My intention was to create an object called "console"
> and create a function on that object called "log()" and create an instance of
> that object in the global namespace, thus simulating the console.log() web
> developers are used in browsers.
>
> However, what I found is, without me creating these objects, they appear to
> already exist in the default implementation of v8. In other words, if I write
> console.log("Hello, World") the script runs without error, which tells me
> that the console object exists, and the log() function exists.
>
> So rather than re-invent the wheel and implement my own version of
> console.log() I thought it might just be simpler to find a way to capture the
> output of what already exists. Thing is, I have no idea where to start.
>
> Also, which console.log() implementation are you using? The one from
> d8-console.cc? One from Node.js or Chromium? A custom one?
> I am assuming that the embedded V8 library includes by default the console
> object
Ah I see you're right, this is now included in the initial context. It looks
like you need to use `debug::SetConsoleDelegate(isolate, ConsoleDelegate*)` in
order to provide the behaviour you want --- however, I'm not sure how this is
exposed to the public API. Inspector folks could help more with that.
It looks like by default, the Isolate's console_delegate_ is null, and the
builtin console.log returns early if that's the case.
> We are using 6.9.167 of the v8 engine in this project.
>
> I hope that makes more sense now - sorry for the poor quality initial
> question.
> Gerry
>
>
> --
> --
> v8-users mailing list
> v8-users@googlegroups.com
> http://groups.google.com/group/v8-users
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "v8-users" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to v8-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
--
v8-users mailing list
v8-users@googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-users
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"v8-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to v8-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
