Simple Syntax Debugging

[danc96371935]

Hi

I write tutorials for school students.  In our CC 2015 edition, we had the following (with visual examples):

1. Recent versions of Dreamweaver have a JavaScript debugger which will find some mistakes.  Errors are displayed in a dark bar near the top of the screen.

2. Dreamweaver will colour the code in a way that may help you detect some errors.  This will come with practice.

With 2017, I can't get DW to identify any errors, even if I type the following:

<script>

alrt ("Hello. How are you today?")

</script>

I've tried the output console and code inspector.

Are there any simple debugging tools I can suggest to beginners, or is there a problem with my installation?

Thanks

[pziecina]

The use of finding syntax errors in Dw 2017, (and 2015) is via linting, which personally i turn off as the linting rules used are simply how someone else thinks javascript should be written, and are often wrong anyway, especially if you use ecma 6 or greater.

As for the javascript debugger, this requires Dw to be launched via the command line, or a custon link defined in the OS's start-up for Dw. Personally, (again) i would recommend using your browsers built-in dev tools, which is much easier to use, supports more modern version and does not show false errors, Dw's js debugger has not been updated since it was originally thought of in 2013.

[osgood_]

pziecina  wrote

The use of finding syntax errors in Dw 2017, (and 2015) is via linting, which personally i turn off as the linting rules used are simply how someone else thinks javascript should be written, and are often wrong anyway, especially if you use ecma 6 or greater.

As for the javascript debugger, this requires Dw to be launched via the command line, or a custon link defined in the OS's start-up for Dw. Personally, (again) i would recommend using your browsers built-in dev tools, which is much easier to use, supports more modern version and does not show false errors, Dw's js debugger has not been updated since it was originally thought of in 2013.

Personally I thnk pretty much all linters, validators and debuggers are useless to a point, even more so in cases of pages with mixed languages - hey-ho what webpage doesnt use mixed language these days or does everyone still develop their html in an html file, css in a css file, php in a php file, javascript in a js file etc. I've tested out maybe 8+ bits of web-development software over the last couple of weeks and they all do it differently and come up with different variations. I would not rely on them, they maybe can provide some insight into a problem existing but locating that problem or understand what the debugger/validator is saying is another matter.

Happy coding, some of the best editors where those where you had to stand on your own 2 feet. These modern editors I don't really know about - they look the business but can also rain confusion....

[danc96371935]

Thanks good people - I just wanted to make sure I wasn't missing anything obvious.  I don't think DW is a particularly good application for school aged beginners but some teachers seem to want to go with it.

[pziecina]

Dw is i think trying to target a specific type of user, (bootstrap, sass, git) and not those who write their own javascript, or very modern css. If your students are planning for a future in web development i would recommend re-assesing the use of Dw once Dw2018 is released.

I am not trying to say do not use Dw, just that students learning web development now, must think about advances in html/css/javascript in the next few years, which unfortunatly does not appear to be a priority for Dw development, but may change with the next version, as they are trying to play 'catch-up', (unfortunatly jumping over the inclussion of essentials).

[danc96371935]

I'm a publisher, so we just try and create resources for the products teachers are using.  DW wouldn't be my choice for teaching newbies.  Far from it, to be honest

[rayek.elfin]

danc96371935  wrote

I'm a publisher, so we just try and create resources for the products teachers are using.  DW wouldn't be my choice for teaching newbies.  Far from it, to be honest

There must be some disconnect between certain teachers who you target your books at, and actual real-world developers and web agencies. Personally I know a lot of web agencies, developers, students and teachers, and truly NO-ONE uses Dreamweaver to code with these days. No-one. The only people I know who use Dreamweaver are active on this forum.

A student of mine told me she had used DW while taking a basic web page coding class at her highschool a few years ago. Seems DW still lingers on in those places. Understandable, since most highschool teachers are quite... set in their ways, and will not/cannot keep up with the speed at which web development evolves.

Unfortunately that means teaching their students outdated techniques and software. Not always, of course; but more often than not it seems to be the case. Then again, who can blame them? Public school teachers are grossly underpaid, and required to put in a ridiculous number of hours outside teaching and prep. Everywhere, any country.

[pziecina]

I've got to agree with you.

The problem with Dw, is that many who are involved more directly with the development team than us, are people who write or teach about Dw. This means their main focus is the very basics as far as code goes, and simplicity of use for users.

Unfortunatly this means that much of what is required in 'the real world' is not included in Dw.

[osgood_]

rayek.elfin  wrote

and truly NO-ONE uses Dreamweaver to code with these days. No-one. The only people I know who use Dreamweaver are active on this forum.

I tend to agree. I think that is largley because if you study or pay to be taught how to become a web-developer you expect to be taught how to code, not just use extentions and a few point and click snippets which DW contains and then be expected to pay top-dollar for the privilage of using it. There are good/better free products out there that those who teach web-development will be advising their students to use. To be fair Brackets from Adobe is one of them but I have my doubts if Brackets will get the updates it needs as Adobe arent exactly renowned for giving their products away.

Once you have learnt to code in say Atom, Brackets, Sublime, VS Code (all free) you are hardly likely to convert to Dreamweaver. If you ever learn to code in Dreamweaver the opposite can be said, because the other programs offer so much more for coders.

I think DW started to go wrong because they got lazy, employed poor developers, who never exactly got anything right and then were backed into a corner and started to quickly introduce 3rd party components and charge for them, nice if you can pull it off.

Its still a good basic html editor and can do much the same as any other html editor. It has fantasic management tools which hardly any other editor has but its vasty overpriced in my opinion for what it offers in comparrison to say something like JetBrains products, so no one who is a serious web-developer will even consider it, plus it does have a tarnished reputaion for being used mainly by amatuers and I know its snobbery but professionals dont want to be associated with amatuers. It has a hard task to rescue its self.

[rayek.elfin]

You've hit the nail on the head. Also, editors such as Atom and Sublime are almost completely adaptable and customizable to an individual developer's needs, and all for free. Add to that the fact that DW's development team can't really hope to compete with hundreds of professional developers actively contributing packages, updates and add-ons to Atom, Sublime, Netbeans, and other code editors and IDEs which cater exactly to what is used by themselves in their dev workflow on a daily basis, and it is understandable Dreamweaver isn't going to win many new zealots, but for the odd amateur who has no idea what is available out there.

Just last week I taught a beginner's html/css class to prospective front-end developers, and Atom gives them a live-reload server, built-in w3c validation, automatic code beautifier, a todo manager, and much more to assist in their learning. And it looks non-intimidating - compare Dreamweaver with all its fluff. It's not a very attractive proposition.

On top of all of this forward-looking visual editing front-end dev products like Pinegrow hook effortlessly into Atom (and existing dev workflows) and assist front-end devs to become more efficient.

It's a bit of a shame, really. I started out with DW 1, but after version 4/Ultradev things had already started to go awry somehow. I sympathize with the current members of the DW development team at Adobe: their job is only going to become harder and harder over time. At this point I just do not see Dreamweaver survive in the long/mid term.