AJAX logging tools?

[Phil]

I'm trying to investigate the workings of a Web page associated with
some large, complicated, and (in some cases) obfuscated JavaScript
files. What I want to do is load this page into a browser, perform some
of the actions that trigger that JS code, and then get a report back
that tells me what happened: which functions were called, in what
order, what functions they called, etc.

Is there a free tool out there that can do something like this?

 

[Stevo]

I'm trying to investigate the workings of a Web page associated with
some large, complicated, and (in some cases) obfuscated JavaScript
files. What I want to do is load this page into a browser, perform some
of the actions that trigger that JS code, and then get a report back
that tells me what happened: which functions were called, in what
order, what functions they called, etc.

Sounds like you've been given the task of reverse engineering your
competitors code.

Is there a free tool out there that can do something like this?

I hope there isn't such a tool.

 

[David Mark]

I'm trying to investigate the workings of a Web page associated with
some large, complicated, and (in some cases) obfuscated JavaScript
files. What I want to do is load this page into a browser, perform some
of the actions that trigger that JS code, and then get a report back
that tells me what happened: which functions were called, in what
order, what functions they called, etc.

Is there a free tool out there that can do something like this?

There certainly is, but unless this page was written with my API, it
won't do you any good.

For a random page, use Firebug, Visual Studio, Opera's console, etc.
Obfuscation doesn't really enter into it.

Before stealing (er studying) the code, you might want to consider the
source. Do you really want to mimic their design? What if the author
is a lunatic?

 

[Phil]

For a random page, use Firebug, Visual Studio, Opera's console, etc.
Obfuscation doesn't really enter into it.

I don't have access to VS (can you say "cheapskate"?), and neither
Firebug nor Opera give me enough info to know what's going on - or maybe
I'm just lousy at using them. Got anything else?

Before stealing (er studying) the code, you might want to consider the
source. Do you really want to mimic their design?

Absolutely not! I want to improve upon it (á la Greasemonkey, or maybe
an XPI) - but first I have to understand it.

What if the author is a lunatic?

Based on what I've seen so far, I'm already convinced that he is. ;-)

 

[David Mark]

I don't have access to VS (can you say "cheapskate"?), and neither
Firebug nor Opera give me enough info to know what's going on - or maybe
I'm just lousy at using them. Got anything else?

It sounds like you are lousy at using them.

Absolutely not! I want to improve upon it (á la Greasemonkey, or maybe
an XPI) - but first I have to understand it.

Do you have to understand how their design works?

Based on what I've seen so far, I'm already convinced that he is. ;-)

All the more reason to ignore whatever he did.

 

[Christoph Boget]

I don't have access to VS (can you say "cheapskate"?), and neither

It sounds like you are lousy at using them.

Except that Firebug doesn't provide backtrace functionality, which is what
it sounds like the OP is looking for. It would be a even more of a godsend
if it did, though.

thnx,
Christoph

 

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Except that Firebug doesn't provide backtrace functionality,

If you mean the synonym of stack trace: Yes, it does. Actually, JavaScript
provides this feature all by itself already, with the `stack' string
property of Error objects. But Firebug allows you to click the item in the
displayed stack trace and jump to the corresponding function.

which is what it sounds like the OP is looking for. It would be a even
more of a godsend if it did, though.

It is


PointedEars