Add a ChromeClient method to send message traces from WebCore to the client.
Created attachment 154556 [details] Patch
Created attachment 154558 [details] Patch
Comment on attachment 154558 [details] Patch Attachment 154558 [details] did not pass efl-ews (efl): Output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/13339596
Comment on attachment 154558 [details] Patch Attachment 154558 [details] did not pass qt-wk2-ews (qt): Output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/13340602
Comment on attachment 154558 [details] Patch View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=154558&action=review > Source/WebKit2/WebProcess/WebCoreSupport/WebChromeClient.cpp:779 > + if (!m_page->corePage()->settings()->messageTracingEnabled()) > + return; In your related patch you're always checking this condition before calling the function. Is it really necessary to perform the check again?
(In reply to comment #5) > (From update of attachment 154558 [details]) > View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=154558&action=review > > > Source/WebKit2/WebProcess/WebCoreSupport/WebChromeClient.cpp:779 > > + if (!m_page->corePage()->settings()->messageTracingEnabled()) > > + return; > > In your related patch you're always checking this condition before calling the function. Is it really necessary to perform the check again? I considered that, but wanted to protect against bad future selves who ignore the setting before calling traceMessage(). I'm open to pulling it out, or replacing it with an assert.
Created attachment 154681 [details] Patch Renamed things to refer to "diagnostic logging".
Comment on attachment 154681 [details] Patch Attachment 154681 [details] did not pass efl-ews (efl): Output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/13340848
Comment on attachment 154681 [details] Patch Attachment 154681 [details] did not pass qt-wk2-ews (qt): Output: http://queues.webkit.org/results/13353827
Committed r123778: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/123778>