Javascript SyntaxCheck

[syrupcore]

In case it saves some one a headache...

console.log(foo) WILL break your JS in Internet Explorer if you leave it in the code since there is no console object in that browser. I use this instead:

Code: Select all

function cl(logit){
	if(window.console&&window.console.firebug){
		console.log(logit)
	}
};

then, to log something to the console it's just:

Code: Select all

cl(foobar);

You can leave those all over your code and IE will not care.

[chrisjlocke]

Will,
That info might be better in the self help forum - it might get lost in here...
(I'll allow you to cross-post on this one occassion! )

[MikeyB]

In case it saves some one a headache...
...
You can leave those all over your code and IE will not care.

COOOOOOOOL
I never know Firebug was so powerful, and never know you could set break points till I read the link you posted earlier.

I use Firebug all the time, but now it is even more useful

[fuzzylogic]

Its a bug with phpBB as there is no text after the link. If I edit the post to have a full-stop or a smiley on the next line, the underline link shows up.

yeah, that's why I don't use phpBB (anymore).... it's full of bugs and security flaws. Especially the security flaws... had my server cracked once and pulled the plug on all phpBB installs. There have been several major phpBB worms. Be warned, their security sucks. maybe they have finally fixed it, but phpBB has a history of multiple problems. I don't trust the competency of their design and review process.

This latest version does look very nice though. very clean ui.

maybe if they were using RapidPHP their program would work better ...
nah... try joomla
.

[drjee]

well, if not debugging (which would be nice) then at least syntax checking for JS. Also great would be support/integration of some AJAX frameworks.

[llbbl]

You can edit the javascript values right inside of firebug. Implementing firebug features in bluementals is a waste of time. I'm know I can be lazy, but not willing to click (or alt-tab) to a different window? wtf

[drjee]

wow, with this kind of argument, webuilder would have 0 features, since there is always an app which alrerady can do it.

[EvilBMP]

A simple syntax check would be nice ... like the PHP one, as mentioned before - and why not an inline check as implemented for PHP in v9.x?! Sure, Webdeveloper Toolbar or Firebug support these features, but imho Firebug really slows Firefox down if it is enabled all the time... Not that nice working environment...
And the JS Console is always one click away - definitely it's no number one must have feature, but it would be nice - why not?!

The framework support is really difficult - the frameworks are always changing and somebody has to update the libraries for the auto-completion. Who wants to do this, especially for which framework?! There are so many out there - ok some of them are more popular then others - but nevertheless somebody has to overview the changes...

Maybe the DEV-Team implements an interface, so that people from the community can implement such specific features But imho I think it's better to develop / enhance the application itself - just think of storing files to FTP (with storing process in the background - so that the application doesn't freeze, if you have connection problems); but that's another topic

Just my two cents, EvilBMP

[syrupcore]

wow, with this kind of argument, webuilder would have 0 features, since there is always an app which alrerady can do it.

There isn't "always an app" that you presumably already have open. ;)

[multifarious]

I wonder, IF there would be a syntax checker, how advanced should it be?

I'm asking since this:

testme =function(){ alert('test') }();

is a perfectly valid JavaScript syntax though I have had several people pointing similair constructs out to me as being in error (HAR!!).. And, I have to admit, in most occasions it probably will be, yet it is still aloowed (and worse).. This is even more so when you start looking at the more advanced Javascript frameworks out there. Anyone ever had a look at how the code looks you write for Dojo? if not, you should... it doesn't look like ANYTHING javascript...

Just thought I'd bring this up...

edit: the above code snippet will be executed immediately at runtime due to the trailing parenthesis (sp?)... just try it in your browser..

[blepore]

I would imagine that Blumentals would just integrate JSLint into WeBuilder if there was a high demand for a JavaScript syntax checker. It could be quite useful, but it would be nice if it could recognize more of the various JavaScript libraries. We use Prototype/Scriptalicious here, and JSLint always complains about it.

[verlsnake]

Can I add code assist support for client-side JavaScript frameworks - like e.g. SmartClient - into the mix ? With SmartClient, I have the choice to author against XML OR JavaScript; I would like to have full WeBuilder support for SmartClient authoring against JavaScript OR XML; the information is already there in the form of a comprehensive XML file.
Can I just feed the info from such a XML file into WeBuilder somehow ?

[syrupcore]

@verlsnake - I don't think so or at least not that I'm aware of.