Confirmed users
673
edits
DevTools/Features/Debugger: Difference between revisions
→Protocol Transports
| Line 62: | Line 62: | ||
* Shouldn't need sockets for in-process debugging, can probably just post events directly to/from the handler thread. | * Shouldn't need sockets for in-process debugging, can probably just post events directly to/from the handler thread. | ||
* Need to figure out transport between chrome/content for e10s (See inter-process dispatch, below). | * Need to figure out transport between chrome/content for e10s (See inter-process dispatch, below). | ||
** Content processes will need their own root actor that can enumerate/dispatch to tabs hosted in their process. | |||
** Presumably needs to use different APIs to list active tabs than we use in the chrome process (needs investigation). | |||
** Ask content processes to start up debugging host (chrome process will have UI cues, will probably just forward those to content processes over messageManager). | |||
* WebSockets (not needed for an initial implementation). | * WebSockets (not needed for an initial implementation). | ||
* How do we represent the actor tree across multiple connections | * How do we represent the actor tree across multiple connections | ||
** Same actor tree exposed to each connection | ** Same actor tree exposed to each connection | ||
** Thread attachment scoped to connection, or are all connections treated equally? | ** Thread attachment scoped to connection, or are all connections treated equally? | ||
=== Protocol Handler Thread === | === Protocol Handler Thread === | ||