Comments on: Developer Tools in Firefox http://blog.johnath.com/2010/03/10/developer-tools-in-firefox/ johnath in blog form Thu, 26 Jan 2012 13:11:15 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: ~robcee/ – Inspector Impetus http://blog.johnath.com/2010/03/10/developer-tools-in-firefox/comment-page-1/#comment-215350 ~robcee/ – Inspector Impetus Fri, 21 May 2010 14:51:03 +0000 http://blog.johnath.com/?p=461#comment-215350 [...] to replace tools like Firebug and DOM Inspector – they are awesome, and we’re still totally committed to helping them be the best they can be. We think there’s a group however, that doesn’t need the depth [...] [...] to replace tools like Firebug and DOM Inspector – they are awesome, and we’re still totally committed to helping them be the best they can be. We think there’s a group however, that doesn’t need the depth [...]

]]> By: simon evans http://blog.johnath.com/2010/03/10/developer-tools-in-firefox/comment-page-1/#comment-215269 simon evans Fri, 02 Apr 2010 15:50:42 +0000 http://blog.johnath.com/?p=461#comment-215269 Hi. Just following links from a google search and ended up at your 2006 blog on the bizarre ancient taxonomy of animals (shivering, belonging to the emperor, resembling flies, etc, etc). I just wanted to check that you knew - or at least now know - that this delightful list was created by Jorge Luis Borges, and then put into the fabulous context you quote (viz the chinese encyclopaedia etc). Borges did this a lot - pretending he had 'discovered" things he had actually created. If you didn't know that, then perhaps you don't know Borges at all, in which case I envy you, because he is the most mind-stretching writer I know of, but not especially prolific, and it is all before you. All the best, Simon. Hi. Just following links from a google search and ended up at your 2006 blog on the bizarre ancient taxonomy of animals (shivering, belonging to the emperor, resembling flies, etc, etc). I just wanted to check that you knew – or at least now know – that this delightful list was created by Jorge Luis Borges, and then put into the fabulous context you quote (viz the chinese encyclopaedia etc). Borges did this a lot – pretending he had ‘discovered” things he had actually created. If you didn’t know that, then perhaps you don’t know Borges at all, in which case I envy you, because he is the most mind-stretching writer I know of, but not especially prolific, and it is all before you. All the best, Simon.

]]> By: Aaron Mc Adam http://blog.johnath.com/2010/03/10/developer-tools-in-firefox/comment-page-1/#comment-215236 Aaron Mc Adam Wed, 24 Mar 2010 14:01:35 +0000 http://blog.johnath.com/?p=461#comment-215236 I still think a lot needs to be done with fixing the slowdowns Firebug can cause. I've had to move to using Minefield full time now, because on ff 3.6 its unusable at times, spiking to 1.2 gig of memory usage, etc. I still think a lot needs to be done with fixing the slowdowns Firebug can cause. I’ve had to move to using Minefield full time now, because on ff 3.6 its unusable at times, spiking to 1.2 gig of memory usage, etc.

]]> By: quarterly developer survey update ✩ Mozilla Hacks – the Web developer blog http://blog.johnath.com/2010/03/10/developer-tools-in-firefox/comment-page-1/#comment-215224 quarterly developer survey update ✩ Mozilla Hacks – the Web developer blog Mon, 22 Mar 2010 19:58:21 +0000 http://blog.johnath.com/?p=461#comment-215224 [...] on improving developer tools for Firefox, for more details and to join the conversation, see Johnathan Nightingale’s post on this [...] [...] on improving developer tools for Firefox, for more details and to join the conversation, see Johnathan Nightingale’s post on this [...]

]]> By: pd http://blog.johnath.com/2010/03/10/developer-tools-in-firefox/comment-page-1/#comment-215196 pd Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:42:51 +0000 http://blog.johnath.com/?p=461#comment-215196 @Scot Garman: Have you tried Chromebug? @Scot Garman: Have you tried Chromebug?

]]> By: pd http://blog.johnath.com/2010/03/10/developer-tools-in-firefox/comment-page-1/#comment-215195 pd Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:37:55 +0000 http://blog.johnath.com/?p=461#comment-215195 Re an ability to allow Firebug to save live changes to the remote files, I am absolutely desperate for this feature. I don't see this feature as "a huge (and possibly unwelcome) change in direction for Firebug" at all. Sure there are a lot of devs out there who use a variety of version control systems that may have trouble with it. However for all of us who FTP down files to an editor on our local computers and Ctrl + S changes straight back to the server, then have to reload the browser to test again, saving live edits would be a godsend. Does anyone have any perspective on how much work this would take? Is it feasible to do this as a Firebug extension? Re an ability to allow Firebug to save live changes to the remote files, I am absolutely desperate for this feature.

I don’t see this feature as “a huge (and possibly unwelcome) change in direction for Firebug” at all. Sure there are a lot of devs out there who use a variety of version control systems that may have trouble with it. However for all of us who FTP down files to an editor on our local computers and Ctrl + S changes straight back to the server, then have to reload the browser to test again, saving live edits would be a godsend.

Does anyone have any perspective on how much work this would take? Is it feasible to do this as a Firebug extension?

]]> By: pd http://blog.johnath.com/2010/03/10/developer-tools-in-firefox/comment-page-1/#comment-215194 pd Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:33:06 +0000 http://blog.johnath.com/?p=461#comment-215194 @jjBarton Personally I upgrade Firefox as soon as it is stable and my extensions are ready. If Firebug is not ready before a new version of Firefox, I will not upgrade. Not too sure what you are trying to say about confusion b/w Fbug and Fx teams but I think Fbug should always be ready before new upgrades. @jjBarton

Personally I upgrade Firefox as soon as it is stable and my extensions are ready. If Firebug is not ready before a new version of Firefox, I will not upgrade.

Not too sure what you are trying to say about confusion b/w Fbug and Fx teams but I think Fbug should always be ready before new upgrades.

]]> By: pd http://blog.johnath.com/2010/03/10/developer-tools-in-firefox/comment-page-1/#comment-215193 pd Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:28:11 +0000 http://blog.johnath.com/?p=461#comment-215193 I am absolutely over the moon to read this sort of post. As a web dev Firebug has been the best piece of software I've ever used. No exceptions. With the recent uptake since Mozilla started taking an interest in Joe Hewitt's baby, the most impression aspect of Firebug has been the apparent engineering infrastructure built as the foundations that never seemed to be there initially. All those unit tests and so on seem to really have made a significant difference to quality. The other great thing has been the level and frequency of information about the project that is being made available by the devs. The period of silence after Joe left Mozilla was 'deafeningly' scary. Not a release was seen for a long time until other browser's made Mozilla look bad for not maintaining Firebug. So it's great to see movement, even if the release numbering is confusing as buggery :) A function that could really help devs that might be built into Firebug is that of helping devs write JS code that will be run by tracemonkey or that is optimised in general. A first step here would be to get Firebug simply displaying which code is traced and with the upcoming method+tracing (mick) jaggermonkey it would also be great to know which code is being optimised through method as well. I am absolutely over the moon to read this sort of post. As a web dev Firebug has been the best piece of software I’ve ever used. No exceptions.

With the recent uptake since Mozilla started taking an interest in Joe Hewitt’s baby, the most impression aspect of Firebug has been the apparent engineering infrastructure built as the foundations that never seemed to be there initially. All those unit tests and so on seem to really have made a significant difference to quality.

The other great thing has been the level and frequency of information about the project that is being made available by the devs. The period of silence after Joe left Mozilla was ‘deafeningly’ scary. Not a release was seen for a long time until other browser’s made Mozilla look bad for not maintaining Firebug.

So it’s great to see movement, even if the release numbering is confusing as buggery :)

A function that could really help devs that might be built into Firebug is that of helping devs write JS code that will be run by tracemonkey or that is optimised in general. A first step here would be to get Firebug simply displaying which code is traced and with the upcoming method+tracing (mick) jaggermonkey it would also be great to know which code is being optimised through method as well.

]]> By: James http://blog.johnath.com/2010/03/10/developer-tools-in-firefox/comment-page-1/#comment-215190 James Mon, 15 Mar 2010 19:06:42 +0000 http://blog.johnath.com/?p=461#comment-215190 Jonathan, I've seen the progress towards #2 and I am frankly very confused. The two things that I've seen you guys working on are a "console" and an "inspector" - two tools that are in Firebug today with those exact names. So I figured that they were going to replace Firebug or at least part of it but this post seems to say they are meant to _compete_ with it. As I read the comments so far on this post from web developers, that is clearly not what they want - they talk about performance profiling, memory profiling, CSS analysis, code coverage, enhancing view source, record-amd-replay, dead code elimination, and that is a sampling from the 20 comments above. Of all the tools to work on, and all the things web developers are crying out for, why this? You say the reason for #2 is "other browsers are copying Firebug and shipping their tools by default". But what I think you miss is that they have no other option; none offer or will offer an extensions API powerful enough to let you build a Firebug-like tool, and so they have to integrate it. Mozilla doesn't have to because web developers are more than savvy enough to download an extension. So I disagree that them building in tools is something Mozilla needs to respond to: it is a response to Mozilla. You get to pick what gets integrated and what doesn't, while they don't have that option. So I truly don't understand - Firebug has a stunning developer mindshare and brand name. It's what replaced abort() debugging on the web. There is so much else to do in the developer tools space to do either as Firebug extensions or new tools outside of Firebug, and I think it's very worrisome that the first step I'm seeing is a harmful one. Jonathan, I’ve seen the progress towards #2 and I am frankly very confused. The two things that I’ve seen you guys working on are a “console” and an “inspector” – two tools that are in Firebug today with those exact names. So I figured that they were going to replace Firebug or at least part of it but this post seems to say they are meant to _compete_ with it. As I read the comments so far on this post from web developers, that is clearly not what they want – they talk about performance profiling, memory profiling, CSS analysis, code coverage, enhancing view source, record-amd-replay, dead code elimination, and that is a sampling from the 20 comments above. Of all the tools to work on, and all the things web developers are crying out for, why this?

You say the reason for #2 is “other browsers are copying Firebug and shipping their tools by default”. But what I think you miss is that they have no other option; none offer or will offer an extensions API powerful enough to let you build a Firebug-like tool, and so they have to integrate it. Mozilla doesn’t have to because web developers are more than savvy enough to download an extension. So I disagree that them building in tools is something Mozilla needs to respond to: it is a response to Mozilla. You get to pick what gets integrated and what doesn’t, while they don’t have that option.

So I truly don’t understand – Firebug has a stunning developer mindshare and brand name. It’s what replaced abort() debugging on the web. There is so much else to do in the developer tools space to do either as Firebug extensions or new tools outside of Firebug, and I think it’s very worrisome that the first step I’m seeing is a harmful one.

]]> By: Cdouy http://blog.johnath.com/2010/03/10/developer-tools-in-firefox/comment-page-1/#comment-215189 Cdouy Mon, 15 Mar 2010 12:52:19 +0000 http://blog.johnath.com/?p=461#comment-215189 I reviewing all of the aforementioned comments I have come to a few conclusions: 1. Having development tools/extensions integrated into a high performance browser is very much appreciated. 2. Not everyone agrees on which tools they wish to have access to. I suggest that FF3.6+ ship with a "default" profile - no extensions & and customizable "development" profile - with a choice of extensions at installation time. This would give a variety of developers many different options for creating "developement" profiles to use, all while maintaining the existing default functionality of FF. just my 2. I reviewing all of the aforementioned comments I have come to a few conclusions:

1. Having development tools/extensions integrated into a high performance browser is very much appreciated.
2. Not everyone agrees on which tools they wish to have access to.

I suggest that FF3.6+ ship with a “default” profile – no extensions & and customizable “development” profile – with a choice of extensions at installation time.

This would give a variety of developers many different options for creating “developement” profiles to use, all while maintaining the existing default functionality of FF.

just my 2.

]]>