Support re-reading scope variables in protocol and on backed.

Source/devtools/protocol.json

Index: Source/devtools/protocol.json
diff --git a/Source/devtools/protocol.json b/Source/devtools/protocol.json
index fed0b2f2f0d27a2a846563fdd74a6f4e7f0a987a..54896b5c0d95f675b386795327f0439b90aaf3f3 100644
--- a/Source/devtools/protocol.json
+++ b/Source/devtools/protocol.json
@@ -3022,6 +3022,17 @@
                 ],
                 "hidden": true,
                 "description": "Changes value of variable in a callframe or a closure. Either callframe or function must be specified. Object-based scopes are not supported and must be mutated manually."
+            },
+            {
+                "name": "updateCallFrameScopes",

[yurys, 2013/07/16 07:45:05]

Why is it called updateCallFrameScopes here and rereadScopes in all other
places. Also 'updateFoo' sounds to me more like request to set new value. Why
not rereadCallFrameScopes or getCallFrameScopes. On the other hand there may be
a better verb than 'reread'. In any case we should be consistent in naming. 

[Peter.Rybin, 2013/07/16 12:02:27]

I guess we should discuss naming.

+                "parameters": [
+                    { "name": "callFrameId", "$ref": "CallFrameId", "description": "Call frame id that scopes must be re-read of." }
+                ],
+                "returns": [
+                    { "name": "scopeChain", "type": "array", "items": { "$ref": "Scope" }, "description": "Scope chain for this call frame." }
+                ],
+                "hidden": true,

[Peter.Rybin, 2013/07/14 23:13:16]

We may want to make it public, since there is an external request for this
feature.

[yurys, 2013/07/16 07:45:05]

Let's keep it hidden for some time to make sure it sticks in the protocol and
then publish it.

+                "description": "Gets a fresh copy of variable scopes of a call frame currently on stack."
             }
         ],
         "events": [