3 ms·
We've tried 2 or 3 existing Javascript error tracking systems in the past. None of them helped much. Performance is not the feature I care about. On the other
by gregdetre 15y ago
We've tried 2 or 3 existing Javascript error tracking systems in the past. None of them helped much.
Performance is not the feature I care about.
On the other hand, I would be delighted to pay to get more actionable information about our errors. It's so so hard to determine exactly where in the code, and under what circumstances, errors in the browser happen.
- rakeshpai 15y agoHey Greg, The challenge you have mentioned is real, and is hard to crack. I certainly haven't solved the problem to my satisfaction yet. However, I'm rather far along the way. A lot of errors are classified as being irrelevant (I call it "muted", but that's a terminology thing), and the ones that are in your face are based on relevance and frequency. This is a very rudimentary way of deciding importance, but it's something. At least it's not a raw list of logs. Improving the quality of "actionable information" as you put it will be the biggest (and most interesting and fun) challenge at Errorception. It'll get better over time.
- gregdetre 15y agoThat sounds promising. I'll take a look. P.S. I'm at greg at memrise dot com if you make further progress and are looking for beta testers.