-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 30k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Uniform way to trigger debugger on first line #12630
Comments
After hearing from the IDE vendors, IMHO we should forget about |
I'm OK with keeping I'm also OK with backporting |
It seems to me that if you ignore the
Thinking about this further, I'd be +1 for abandoning If we're going to do that then we should not backport EDIT: I'd also say that the number of times I've used the inspector without the |
@sam-github the thing is that you're not supposed to do |
If you look at the code it's actually syntactic sugar for three operations:
I think ideally it would have only been used by users, while vendors used the three explicit args BTW: should it be "break" of "brake"? |
I think it's break as in breakpoint. |
I think we should first define the best ux for debugging with a break, and
then work backwards.
|
The IDE vendors are now making it clear a breaking change in args will not be backported: JetBrains: #12364 (comment) VScode: #12364 (comment) (the 👍s is mine) Seems we'll have to keep |
My personal, pedantic vote is Alternatively, ... I suppose the ship has already sailed on that though, so maybe we should just keep |
I'm OK with @refack and @Fishrock123 's suggestion of keeping What about the briefly existing |
I think |
I wish we had added |
@Fishrock123 so, you want |
|
No I would rather it all just be |
I would prefer |
@jkrems You wouldn't do that, in Node 8 |
We can have it all be inspect, we just have to backport --inspect-brk, and support --debug-brk going forward for a while. Maybe the CTC needs to hash this out f2f. |
@gibfahn But then a tool that passes only |
@jkrems I think we have two use-cases:
|
@billti @roblourens @prigara we would like to hear your latest opinions on two things:
|
I thought the general agreement was:
This means future tools (after node 6 phased out) won't have to deal with any "why are halve of the flags called --inspect and the other half --debug", users get CLI flags as nice & succinct as the original |
@jkrems I also think there is wide agreement on 1 |
@refack The thing is: P.S.: Even if today's vendors won't use |
I agree with @jkrems. As long as |
I kind of agree. My personal preference is to make the P.S. voice your opinion on our internal issue #12768 |
As pointed out elsewhere in the thread, going back to
|
I want to reduce bikeshedding... I think we can all agree that the docs and |
Yes, those official parameters are For me the fact that we'll have to keep |
@Fishrock123 during the transition when both protocols were avalible, all vendors had a version update that was compatible with both. There was no back-porting :( As mentioned above by all vendors, current versions will not be able to debug node8, and they firmly state that they will not backport. So users will have to upgrade/buy a new IDE |
All current versions are compatible with both protocols |
Cross-posting from: #12580 (comment)
|
I'll try to sum:
|
They all had a release cycle while both protocols were available. Unfortunately they used |
To elaborate on what @refack already said: What was stopping them was that |
If I understand correctly CTC agreed to restore |
Pinging @ChALkeR: Did you gather the information you needed to gather? Are we prepared to move forward with restoring |
This is my understanding as well, and #12949 accomplishes that (and more).
I agree, and in fact I think this might be @ChALkeR's primary concern. Based on this, #12949 should not add back On the other hand, it could be helpful to our users to print a friendly message when |
PR-URL: nodejs#12949 Fixes: nodejs#12364 Fixes: nodejs#12630 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Jan Krems <jan.krems@gmail.com>
Ref: #12364
Have
--inspect --debug-brk
as a uniform way to trigger debug on first line--inspect --debug-brk
combo to v7+v8 (inspector: restore --debug-brk alias #12580)--inspect-brk
(re: inspector: makedebug
an alias forinspect
#11441)(IMHO if we keep it
--debug-brk
,--inspect-brk
will probably never be used)node8
?--debug-port
/inspect-port
?v6
andv7
requires the combo--inspect[=port] --debug-brk[=port]
is specifyingport
on both args a valid invocation, and in that case whichport
wins?Have
--inspect-brk
as a uniform way to trigger debug on first line--inspect --debug-brk
combo in v7 alone (deprecation notice yes/no) (i.e. don't land src: Remove support for --debug #12197 in v7)--inspect-brk
alias tov6
(inspector: enable --inspect-brk in v6 #12615)[new comment] this will make
--inspect-break
a feature of recent versions of 6.x, but it can't change the past: versions of 6.x will always exist without this feature, and so will not be debuggable by third-party tooling [without special treatment]v4
it's irrelevant since it's a different protocol and other means of detection and handling is necessaryHelp the users adapt to our plan:
runtimeExecutable
version detection microsoft/vscode-node-debug2#100)User feedback
I'm trying to get more feedback from @roblourens and JetBrains, so you could make the best decision.
Quote from youtrack#WEB-26568
Comment from @roblourens regression: 3rd party debuggers are incompatible with node8 nighlies #12364 (comment)
P.S. at present WebStorm and IDEA based IDEs can't trigger debug in node8 nightlies (nor can VSCode)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: