Bug 109488

Summary: Web Inspector: fix closure compilation warnings caused by setVariableValue change
Product: WebKit Reporter: Peter Rybin <prybin>
Component: Web Inspector (Deprecated)Assignee: Nobody <webkit-unassigned>
Status: RESOLVED FIXED    
Severity: Normal CC: apavlov, graouts, joepeck, keishi, loislo, pfeldman, pmuellr, timothy, vsevik, web-inspector-bugs, webkit.review.bot, yurys
Priority: P2    
Version: 528+ (Nightly build)   
Hardware: All   
OS: All   
Attachments:
Description Flags
Patch
none
Patch none

Peter Rybin
Reported 2013-02-11 14:20:35 PST
As reported by vsevik@ (thank you), the change causes several warnings. Source/WebCore/inspector/InjectedScriptSourceTmp.js:600: WARNING - Bad type annotation. Unknown type integer * @param {integer} scopeNumber ^ Source/WebCore/inspector/InjectedScriptSourceTmp.js:618: WARNING - Property setFunctionVariableValue never defined on InjectedScriptHost setter = InjectedScriptHost.setFunctionVariableValue.bind(InjectedScriptHost, func); ^ Source/WebCore/inspector/front-end/protocol-externs.js:2085: WARNING - optional arguments must be at the end DebuggerAgent.setVariableValue = function(opt_callFrameId, opt_functionObjectId, scopeNumber, variableName, newValue, opt_callback) {}
Attachments
Patch (7.29 KB, patch)
2013-02-11 14:35 PST, Peter Rybin
no flags
Patch (8.07 KB, patch)
2013-02-12 09:32 PST, Peter Rybin
no flags
Peter Rybin
Comment 1 2013-02-11 14:35:41 PST
Peter Rybin
Comment 2 2013-02-11 14:37:57 PST
(In reply to comment #1) > Created an attachment (id=187676) [details] > Patch vsevik@, could you please take a look at the patch. Note that in order to satisfy requirement that optional parameters go last, I tried to reorder parameters in Inspector.json, those ones that originally were first, but recently became optional. I'm not sure though, that we can afford reordering parameters.
Yury Semikhatsky
Comment 3 2013-02-12 01:29:33 PST
Comment on attachment 187676 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=187676&action=review > Source/WebCore/inspector/Inspector.json:2936 > + { "name": "newValue", "$ref": "Runtime.CallArgument", "description": "New variable value." }, Can you provide a test for this command?
Yury Semikhatsky
Comment 4 2013-02-12 01:32:23 PST
Comment on attachment 187676 [details] Patch The patch introduces new warnings: Compiling InjectedScriptSource.js... Source/WebCore/inspector/InjectedScriptSourceTmp.js:609: WARNING - actual parameter 2 of InjectedScript.prototype._callFrameForId does not match formal parameter found : (boolean|string) required: string var callFrame = this._callFrameForId(topCallFrame, callFrameId); ^ Source/WebCore/inspector/InjectedScriptSourceTmp.js:614: WARNING - actual parameter 1 of InjectedScript.prototype._parseObjectId does not match formal parameter found : (boolean|string) required: string var parsedFunctionId = this._parseObjectId(functionObjectId); ^ 0 error(s), 2 warning(s), 89.8% typed
Peter Rybin
Comment 5 2013-02-12 01:41:52 PST
Comment on attachment 187676 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=187676&action=review >> Source/WebCore/inspector/Inspector.json:2936 >> + { "name": "newValue", "$ref": "Runtime.CallArgument", "description": "New variable value." }, > > Can you provide a test for this command? I thought LayoutTests/inspector-protocol/debugger-setVariableValue.html was that test.
Yury Semikhatsky
Comment 6 2013-02-12 03:15:55 PST
(In reply to comment #5) > (From update of attachment 187676 [details]) > View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=187676&action=review > > >> Source/WebCore/inspector/Inspector.json:2936 > >> + { "name": "newValue", "$ref": "Runtime.CallArgument", "description": "New variable value." }, > > > > Can you provide a test for this command? > > I thought LayoutTests/inspector-protocol/debugger-setVariableValue.html was that test. Oh, I see. I meant that it would be nice if we had a test that would require changes in accord with your concern https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109488#c2
Peter Rybin
Comment 7 2013-02-12 03:47:43 PST
(In reply to comment #6) > (In reply to comment #5) > > (From update of attachment 187676 [details] [details]) > > View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=187676&action=review > > > > >> Source/WebCore/inspector/Inspector.json:2936 > > >> + { "name": "newValue", "$ref": "Runtime.CallArgument", "description": "New variable value." }, > > > > > > Can you provide a test for this command? > > > > I thought LayoutTests/inspector-protocol/debugger-setVariableValue.html was that test. > > Oh, I see. I meant that it would be nice if we had a test that would require changes in accord with your concern https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=109488#c2 That's right. But so far we don't any client that depends on parameter order. I don't think we should prepare such client only to prove that parameter order in fact changed. However, I wonder if we should change parameter order. For example Java project bindings depends on order and theoretically such changes might go unnoticed unless caught by parameter type checks.
Peter Rybin
Comment 8 2013-02-12 09:32:14 PST
WebKit Review Bot
Comment 9 2013-02-14 09:53:44 PST
Comment on attachment 187882 [details] Patch Clearing flags on attachment: 187882 Committed r142888: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/142888>
WebKit Review Bot
Comment 10 2013-02-14 09:53:49 PST
All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.