Add Options.InteropOptions.BuildCallStackHandler

[scgm0]

A preliminary idea, this would allow one to modify the stack string generation, such as using a map of the source map.

[scgm0]

@lahma What do you think?

[lahma]

Probably would need better documentation and tests, ValueStringBuilder shouldn't be made public. If there's a solid use case for such configuration, why not.

[scgm0]

Probably would need better documentation and tests, ValueStringBuilder shouldn't be made public. If there's a solid use case for such configuration, why not.

No longer exposing ValueStringBuilder to make BuildCallStackHandler return strings directly without manually calling ValueStringBuilder.
Thinking about how to write the tests, as for the documentation it might be later, because my English is very bad (been using translation software)

[scgm0]

@lahma This is my first time writing a test, is it enough?

[lofcz]

If there's a solid use case for such configuration, why not.

We've discussed this over at Acornima adams85/acornima#6
This was previously requested here as well: #490

This should warrant a sufficient use case. As hinted in the included test the feature aims to enable running transpiled TypeScript (and possibly other JS dialects) through Jint with matching error lines etc. Note that debugging is already possible with remapping DebugInformation so this is more of a QoL improvement.

[lahma]

This is starting to look nice with the example use case described with tests! I'm traveling until Saturday but probably with minor tweaks we can merge.

[lofcz]

@scgm0 the PR is missing XML doc for the newly added public members, if you want I can add that for you.
Also thanks for implementing this, much appreciated.

[scgm0]

@scgm0 the PR is missing XML doc for the newly added public members, if you want I can add that for you. Also thanks for implementing this, much appreciated.

Thank you, I need it very much! As I said, my English is terrible, and inaccurate translation can be misleading. . .

[lahma]

One thing that came to mind is that would it be enough just to have callback MapSourcePosition which would by default just return same values back or be null and call stack builder would just call it and all string manipulation would remain in original call stack builder.

[scgm0]

One thing that came to mind is that would it be enough just to have callback MapSourcePosition which would by default just return same values back or be null and call stack builder would just call it and all string manipulation would remain in original call stack builder.

The source map allows mapping function names(Although the typescript compiler does not seem to support it), and there may be users who prefer to use other formats for stack strings. For example, I like to use 4 spaces before at instead of 3.

[lahma]

The current format is node format I guess. We also need to consider if CallStackBuilder could be inherited and methods overridden, maybe configurable properties for indent. Need to tinker a bit

[lofcz]

@scgm0 I've opened a PR against your branch with the docs. Getting win/fw462 to pass the tests requires resigning the Tests assembly due to the added dependency on SourceMaps I believe, win/net8 is ok.

[scgm0]

@scgm0 I've opened a PR against your branch with the docs. Getting win/fw462 to pass tests requires resigning the Tests assembly due to the added dependency on SourceMaps I believe, win/net8 is ok.

Thank you so much!

[scgm0]

I'm sorry, I'm using linux and still don't know why the win test fails (