dump() needs to deal with Objects better about espruino HOT 2 CLOSED

This is an interesting case of dump() being stupid as well: http://forum.espruino.com/conversations/329745

function Test() {
  console.log("Hello");
}
Test.prototype.foo = function() {
  console.log("Hello 2");
};

a = new Test();
delete Test; // we've now lost the original 'Test'
dump();
// outputs just:
// var a = Object.create(a.__proto__.constructor["prototype"]);

then...

A = Object.getPrototypeOf(a).constructor;
dump();
// outputs:
// var a = Object.create(a.__proto__.constructor["prototype"]);
// function A() {console.log("Hello");}
// A.prototype.foo = function () {console.log("Hello 2");};

• First off, it's doing a depth first rather than breadth-first search for the class to use, which reconstructs stuff really badly.
• Then a actually ends up referencing itself in the first instance - Espruino should detect this and instead create a new temporary Class name to output first.
• It'd actually be neat if dump() could take an argument which is the variable to 'start' from - it'd allow you to (for instance) dump just a single class.

from espruino.

Closing this - it seems with the ability to save raw JS to flash I don't think many people are using this now.

from espruino.