Skip to content

Function instrumentation does not work as expected in Chrome 12 #18

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Closed
eriwen opened this issue Apr 23, 2011 · 5 comments
Closed

Function instrumentation does not work as expected in Chrome 12 #18

eriwen opened this issue Apr 23, 2011 · 5 comments
Milestone
0.4

Comments

@eriwen
Copy link
Member

eriwen commented Apr 23, 2011

Running function instrumentation test case at http://eriwen.com/js/stacktrace/testcase4.html loses bottom of stack in Chrome 12.

See test for details.
@victor-homyakov
Copy link
Contributor

Exception stack is somehow corrupted in printStackTrace.implementation.prototype.chrome() - before chrome() I can see one extra line in stack trace (7 lines overall), after chrome() this line is disappeared (only 6 lines left). Investigating further...

@victor-homyakov
Copy link
Contributor

Before chrome() (I've reformatted your test file):

"TypeError: Object #<Object> has no method 'undef'
at Object.createException (http://127.0.0.1:8001/DevTools/StackTrace/javascript-stacktrace/stacktrace.js:81:18)
at Object.run (http://127.0.0.1:8001/DevTools/StackTrace/javascript-stacktrace/stacktrace.js:66:25)
at printStackTrace (http://127.0.0.1:8001/DevTools/StackTrace/javascript-stacktrace/stacktrace.js:57:62)
at instrumented (http://127.0.0.1:8001/DevTools/StackTrace/javascript-stacktrace/stacktrace.js:114:33)
at bar (http://127.0.0.1:8001/DevTools/StackTrace/javascript-stacktrace/testcase4.html:36:9)
at http://127.0.0.1:8001/DevTools/StackTrace/javascript-stacktrace/testcase4.html:41:9
at http://127.0.0.1:8001/DevTools/StackTrace/javascript-stacktrace/testcase4.html:48:7"

after return this[mode](ex):

[
"Object.createException (http://127.0.0.1:8001/DevTools/StackTrace/javascript-stacktrace/stacktrace.js:81:18)",
"Object.run (http://127.0.0.1:8001/DevTools/StackTrace/javascript-stacktrace/stacktrace.js:66:25)",
"printStackTrace (http://127.0.0.1:8001/DevTools/StackTrace/javascript-stacktrace/stacktrace.js:57:62)",
"instrumented (http://127.0.0.1:8001/DevTools/StackTrace/javascript-stacktrace/stacktrace.js:114:33)",
"bar (http://127.0.0.1:8001/DevTools/StackTrace/javascript-stacktrace/testcase4.html:36:9)",
"http://127.0.0.1:8001/DevTools/StackTrace/javascript-stacktrace/testcase4.html:48:7"
]

Line for testcase4.html:41:9 (where bar(); is invoked from foo) is disappeared after stack processing.

@victor-homyakov
Copy link
Contributor

I've changed in my fork script and tests - take a look. Older Chrome versions may work incorrect - original regular expression removed extra lines from stacktrace.

Also I've changed your testcase4.html - where can I put it? In your example bar() should not be expected in stacktrace.

@eriwen
Copy link
Member Author

eriwen commented May 30, 2011

I have merged your changes and pushed. I also added the test/functional directory for those test cases. I have added link to the Jenkins page with a link to the latest functional tests.

So, just check in your testcase4.html and I'll merge it in. After your help with the 0.4 release, I'll add you as a collaborator so you don't have to go configuring this stuff yourself and we won't have to worry about merges etc.

Thanks again,
Eric

@eriwen
Copy link
Member Author

eriwen commented Jul 12, 2011

Fixed, see "chrome stack" test.

@eriwen eriwen closed this as completed Jul 12, 2011
@foxx foxx mentioned this issue Jul 22, 2013
Closed
eriwen added a commit to stacktracejs/stackframe that referenced this issue Apr 30, 2017
@eriwen
Change LICENSE to MIT
5c197fa 
The reason I originally selected the Unlicense when this project
began was to maximize use of the library. However, since then
I've come to learn that such a license actually prevents use and
contribution by some organizations because Unlicense is not an OSI
approved license and is a little risky legally.

See stacktracejs/stacktrace.js#18
eriwen added a commit to stacktracejs/stackframe that referenced this issue Apr 30, 2017
@eriwen
Change LICENSE to MIT
302f6c5 
The reason I originally selected the Unlicense when this project
began was to maximize use of the library. However, since then
I've come to learn that such a license actually prevents use and
contribution by some organizations because Unlicense is not an OSI
approved license and is a little risky legally.

See stacktracejs/stacktrace.js#18
eriwen added a commit that referenced this issue Apr 30, 2017
@eriwen
Change LICENSE to MIT
a9e4d53 
The reason I originally selected the Unlicense when this project
began was to maximize use of the library. However, since then
I've come to learn that such a license actually prevents use and
contribution by some organizations because Unlicense is not an OSI
approved license and is a little risky legally.

See #18
eriwen added a commit to stacktracejs/error-stack-parser that referenced this issue May 18, 2017
@eriwen
Change LICENSE to MIT
b50a335 
The reason I originally selected the Unlicense when this project
began was to maximize use of the library. However, since then
I've come to learn that such a license actually prevents use and
contribution by some organizations because Unlicense is not an OSI
approved license and is a little risky legally.

See stacktracejs/stacktrace.js#18
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Milestone
0.4
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@eriwen @victor-homyakov