Should we make content console messages print to stdout when browser.dom.window.dump.enabled is true?
mh at glandium.org
Fri Aug 3 02:25:51 UTC 2018
On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 12:15:50PM +1000, Mark Hammond wrote:
> On 3/08/2018 5:16 am, Brian Grinstead wrote:
> > In Bug 1439686 we started printing chrome console messages to stdout. At that time we restricted it to chrome callers to avoid extra noise in stdout during local builds - especially since filtering out content messages is a much-requested feature for the Browser Console (Bug 1260877).
> > Interestingly, a page can already get text out to stdout if browser.dom.window.dump.enabled is true using `window.dump`. But the output isn't great when dealing with objects, and it requires the page to change its code.
> > We got a request to enable this for console.log in Bug 1480544 - I'm curious if people have opinions on if/how this should be exposed. Should the output be controlled based on the browser.dom.window.dump.enabled pref? Should we have a second pref controlling itf? Something else?
> This is tricky. I use dump() more than I'd care to admit - it works well in
> content code because you almost never see dump() used in real sites (does
> Chrome even support it?), so there's not a huge amount of "spam" in the
> terminal. Having dump() output from *both* chrome and content can be very
> If we also wrote console.log() from content to the terminal, I fear we would
> then end up in a situation where content spams the terminal, with the only
> mitigation being to flip browser.dom.window.dump.enabled to false - but that
> means we also lose dump() output, throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
> So my vote would be:
> * Leave dump alone - it's basically a firefox-specific easter-egg and no one
> seems to mind that content *could* spam the terminal because it almost never
> does. (I know this wasn't proposed, but it's worth clarifying imo)
> * A new pref that would allow content console.* output to be written to this
> terminal. I'd be fine with this defaulting to true wherever
> browser.dom.window.dump.enabled does.
> Having "dump" in the name of this pref wouldn't be a good option, because
> IMO, it should *not* affect the behaviour of dump()
anything these days, despite being defined in all.js, firefox.js and
other places, it seems it was made a no-op by the error console removal
in bug 1278368.
More information about the firefox-dev