jQuery complete version
Steve McKenzie - February 8, 2007 - 13:37
| Project: | Firebug |
| Version: | 5.x-1.0 |
| Component: | Code |
| Category: | feature request |
| Priority: | normal |
| Assigned: | Unassigned |
| Status: | postponed |
Jump to:
Description
recode the firebug.js into jquery code.
:s kinda scary task but wouldn't be too bad.
#1
firebug.js is a library made available from http://getfirebug.com/lite.html
Please raise this issue there. However I'm sure they will not want to implement this in jquery, since a tool like this is useful for lower-level and broader applications than would be permitted if implemented in jQuery.
#2
firebug lite is fugly, and not very developer friendly in terms of its actual code. its quite messy really.
so this was an idea i had of doing a new version in jquery (not actually the firebug lite package). i actually did recode one in jquery that I never got to finish back at drupalcon boston. I originally wanted it to go in devel like how the devel got the themer stuff added in the 6.x version. Maybe I'll finish it or someone could take over that code to be a 2.x version of firebug.
It actually has a Drupal.printR().
#3
I think it would be silly to try to maintain a jQuery version of firebug lite, in the same way it's kinda silly to try to maintain a python port of Drupal. Firebug (and hence firebug lite) has a very high rate of development and a jQuery port would always be lagging in features (and probably developers and stability) and less desirable. It is better to focus efforts on one common codebase with as few dependencies as possible (firebug lite is mostly NOT used in Drupal). Als, the latest version of firebug lite is very complex, but mostly readable, IMHO.
#4
didn't notice firebug lite got an upgrade. it went without one for ages and that last version had a crappy base.
if this one is actually better, than i agree and sticking with it would be good. but seriously, that last one lacked bad. i couldn't even consider it a firebug lite from what it lacked.