Closed
Bug 187907
Opened 22 years ago
Closed 21 years ago
Expr::toString should be removed or debug-only
Categories
(Core :: XSLT, defect)
Core
XSLT
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
People
(Reporter: sicking, Assigned: peterv)
Details
Attachments
(1 file, 1 obsolete file)
50.67 KB,
patch
|
peterv
:
review+
jst
:
superreview+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
We should not use Expr::toString when outputting error-messages. Once we start
optimizing XPath-expressions there is no way we can recreate the
expression-string to something that is close to what the user typed.
So the question is, do we want to remove Expr::toString entierly, or do we wanna
keep it around for debugging-purposes?
MSVC can show the complete object-tree from just an Expr*, so I don't really
need ::toString, don't know about gdb/CodeWarrior though.
Reporter | ||
Comment 1•22 years ago
|
||
Peterv: you mentioned some time ago that you had something in mind for this?
Reporter | ||
Comment 2•21 years ago
|
||
reassining bugs i'm not working on to default owner
Assignee: bugmail → peterv
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•21 years ago
|
||
I tried this and it saves about 8k on codesize in my OS X optimized build. I've
put it under a define that's turned on in debug builds, but I don't mind
removing the code completely. Objections?
Reporter | ||
Comment 4•21 years ago
|
||
Either way is fine with me
Assignee | ||
Updated•21 years ago
|
Attachment #147450 -
Flags: review?(axel)
Comment 5•21 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 147450 [details] [diff] [review]
v1
put the mSerialize of the Root pattern and expr into the ifdef, too. and no two
#ifdefs in txErrorFunctionCall.
With that, r=me.
Attachment #147450 -
Flags: review?(axel) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•21 years ago
|
||
Attachment #147450 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Assignee | ||
Updated•21 years ago
|
Attachment #147621 -
Flags: superreview?(jst)
Attachment #147621 -
Flags: review+
Comment 7•21 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 147621 [details] [diff] [review]
v1.1
sr=jst
Attachment #147621 -
Flags: superreview?(jst) → superreview+
Assignee | ||
Updated•21 years ago
|
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 21 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•