DevTools: Added error message when the command is invoked from the console with exception

Added error message with stack trace and exception details if exception happened when command in console evaluate.

Committed: https://src.chromium.org/viewvc/blink?view=rev&revision=178471

[aandrey, 2014-07-04 16:57:25]

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/1/Source/core/inspector/Inject...
File Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptBase.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/1/Source/core/inspector/Inject...
Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptBase.cpp:150: RefPtr<JSONObject>
exceptionDetails = resultPair->getObject("exceptionDetails");
so, where is it coming from? did you forget to add some files to this patch?

[kozyatinskiy1, 2014-07-04 17:01:56]

On 2014/07/04 16:57:25, aandrey wrote:
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/1/Source/core/inspector/Inject...
> File Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptBase.cpp (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/1/Source/core/inspector/Inject...
> Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptBase.cpp:150: RefPtr<JSONObject>
> exceptionDetails = resultPair->getObject("exceptionDetails");
> so, where is it coming from? did you forget to add some files to this patch?

My bad, this patch depends on the other patch:
https://codereview.chromium.org/289423002/

[vsevik, 2014-07-14 15:50:28]

We need a test for this.

[vsevik, 2014-07-14 15:50:28]

We need a test for this.

[kozyatinskiy1, 2014-07-15 15:47:22]

On 2014/07/14 15:50:28, vsevik wrote:
> We need a test for this.

Changed existing tests.

[vsevik, 2014-07-15 16:14:33]

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/60001/LayoutTests/inspe...
File LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-syntax-error-expected.txt
(right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/60001/LayoutTests/inspe...
LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-syntax-error-expected.txt:4: Uncaught
SyntaxError: Unexpected token } VM:731
Let's add a test for a non trivial stack trace case.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/60001/Source/core/inspe...
File Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptBase.cpp (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/60001/Source/core/inspe...
Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptBase.cpp:150: RefPtr<JSONObject>
exceptionDetails = resultPair->getObject("exceptionDetails");
Let's extract a method.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/60001/Source/core/inspe...
File Source/core/inspector/InspectorDebuggerAgent.cpp (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/60001/Source/core/inspe...
Source/core/inspector/InspectorDebuggerAgent.cpp:1002:
exceptionDetails->setStackTrace(TypeBuilder::Array<TypeBuilder::Console::CallFrame>::create());
This is worth a comment.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/60001/Source/devtools/f...
File Source/devtools/front_end/console/ConsoleView.js (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/60001/Source/devtools/f...
Source/devtools/front_end/console/ConsoleView.js:800: message = new
WebInspector.ConsoleMessage(target,
WebInspector.ConsoleMessage.MessageSource.JS, level, exceptionDetails.text,
undefined, exceptionDetails.url, exceptionDetails.line, exceptionDetails.column,
undefined, undefined, exceptionDetails.stackTrace);
It would be better if we show both the resulting object and the stack trace in
case of exception.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/60001/Source/devtools/f...
Source/devtools/front_end/console/ConsoleView.js:800: message = new
WebInspector.ConsoleMessage(target,
WebInspector.ConsoleMessage.MessageSource.JS, level, exceptionDetails.text,
undefined, exceptionDetails.url, exceptionDetails.line, exceptionDetails.column,
undefined, undefined, exceptionDetails.stackTrace);
It would be better if we show both the resulting object and the stack trace in
case of exception.

[kozyatinskiy1, 2014-07-16 13:15:47]

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/60001/LayoutTests/inspector/co...
File LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-syntax-error-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/60001/LayoutTests/inspector/co...
LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-syntax-error-expected.txt:4: Uncaught
SyntaxError: Unexpected token } VM:731
On 2014/07/15 16:14:33, vsevik wrote:
> Let's add a test for a non trivial stack trace case.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/60001/Source/core/inspector/In...
File Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptBase.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/60001/Source/core/inspector/In...
Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptBase.cpp:150: RefPtr<JSONObject>
exceptionDetails = resultPair->getObject("exceptionDetails");
On 2014/07/15 16:14:33, vsevik wrote:
> Let's extract a method.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/60001/Source/core/inspector/In...
File Source/core/inspector/InspectorDebuggerAgent.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/60001/Source/core/inspector/In...
Source/core/inspector/InspectorDebuggerAgent.cpp:1002:
exceptionDetails->setStackTrace(TypeBuilder::Array<TypeBuilder::Console::CallFrame>::create());
On 2014/07/15 16:14:33, vsevik wrote:
> This is worth a comment.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/60001/Source/devtools/front_en...
File Source/devtools/front_end/console/ConsoleView.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/60001/Source/devtools/front_en...
Source/devtools/front_end/console/ConsoleView.js:800: message = new
WebInspector.ConsoleMessage(target,
WebInspector.ConsoleMessage.MessageSource.JS, level, exceptionDetails.text,
undefined, exceptionDetails.url, exceptionDetails.line, exceptionDetails.column,
undefined, undefined, exceptionDetails.stackTrace);
On 2014/07/15 16:14:33, vsevik wrote:
> It would be better if we show both the resulting object and the stack trace in
> case of exception.

Done.

[aandrey, 2014-07-17 10:10:06]

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/100001/LayoutTests/insp...
File LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-exception-report.html (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/100001/LayoutTests/insp...
LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-exception-report.html:21:
InspectorTest.dumpConsoleMessages();
you could expand console messages first, and then dump together with the stack
trace. e.g. see inspector/sources/debugger/async-callstack-in-console.html

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/100001/Source/core/insp...
File Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptBase.cpp (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/100001/Source/core/insp...
Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptBase.cpp:86: frames->addItem(callFrame);
callFrame.release()

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/100001/Source/core/insp...
Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptBase.cpp:88:
exceptionDetails->setStackTrace(frames);
frames.release()

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/100001/Source/core/insp...
Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptBase.cpp:90: return exceptionDetails;
ditto

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/100001/Source/core/insp...
Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptBase.cpp:198: *exceptionDetails =
toExceptionDetails(objectExceptionDetails);
objectExceptionDetails.release()

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/100001/Source/devtools/...
File Source/devtools/protocol.json (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/100001/Source/devtools/...
Source/devtools/protocol.json:801: { "name": "exceptionDetails", "$ref":
"Debugger.ExceptionDetails", "optional": true, "description": "Exception
details."}
hidden?

[kozyatinskiy1, 2014-07-17 12:27:23]

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/100001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
File LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-exception-report.html (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/100001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-exception-report.html:21:
InspectorTest.dumpConsoleMessages();
On 2014/07/17 10:10:05, aandrey wrote:
> you could expand console messages first, and then dump together with the stack
> trace. e.g. see inspector/sources/debugger/async-callstack-in-console.html

I don't want dump all stack trace, because stack can contains some
implementation details, like:
InjectedScript._evaluateOn
InjectedScript._evaluateAndWrap
InjectedScript.evaluate

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/100001/Source/core/inspector/I...
File Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptBase.cpp (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/100001/Source/core/inspector/I...
Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptBase.cpp:86: frames->addItem(callFrame);
On 2014/07/17 10:10:06, aandrey wrote:
> callFrame.release()

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/100001/Source/core/inspector/I...
Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptBase.cpp:88:
exceptionDetails->setStackTrace(frames);
On 2014/07/17 10:10:06, aandrey wrote:
> frames.release()

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/100001/Source/core/inspector/I...
Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptBase.cpp:90: return exceptionDetails;
On 2014/07/17 10:10:06, aandrey wrote:
> ditto

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/100001/Source/core/inspector/I...
Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptBase.cpp:198: *exceptionDetails =
toExceptionDetails(objectExceptionDetails);
On 2014/07/17 10:10:06, aandrey wrote:
> objectExceptionDetails.release()

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/100001/Source/devtools/protoco...
File Source/devtools/protocol.json (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/100001/Source/devtools/protoco...
Source/devtools/protocol.json:801: { "name": "exceptionDetails", "$ref":
"Debugger.ExceptionDetails", "optional": true, "description": "Exception
details."}
On 2014/07/17 10:10:06, aandrey wrote:
> hidden?

Done.

[aandrey, 2014-07-17 12:31:58]

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/100001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
File LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-exception-report.html (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/100001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-exception-report.html:21:
InspectorTest.dumpConsoleMessages();
On 2014/07/17 12:27:23, kozyatinskiy wrote:
> On 2014/07/17 10:10:05, aandrey wrote:
> > you could expand console messages first, and then dump together with the
stack
> > trace. e.g. see inspector/sources/debugger/async-callstack-in-console.html
> 
> I don't want dump all stack trace, because stack can contains some
> implementation details, like:
> InjectedScript._evaluateOn
> InjectedScript._evaluateAndWrap
> InjectedScript.evaluate

Yes, to avoid you can use InspectorTest.evaluateInConsole("setTimeout(func,
0)"), declare function func() outside test() w/o constructing the function body
in string texts, and use InspectorTest.waitForNthConsoleMessage()

[aandrey, 2014-07-17 12:33:42]

On 2014/07/17 12:31:58, aandrey wrote:
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/100001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
> File LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-exception-report.html (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/100001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
> LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-exception-report.html:21:
> InspectorTest.dumpConsoleMessages();
> On 2014/07/17 12:27:23, kozyatinskiy wrote:
> > On 2014/07/17 10:10:05, aandrey wrote:
> > > you could expand console messages first, and then dump together with the
> stack
> > > trace. e.g. see inspector/sources/debugger/async-callstack-in-console.html
> > 
> > I don't want dump all stack trace, because stack can contains some
> > implementation details, like:
> > InjectedScript._evaluateOn
> > InjectedScript._evaluateAndWrap
> > InjectedScript.evaluate
> 
> Yes, to avoid you can use InspectorTest.evaluateInConsole("setTimeout(func,
> 0)"), declare function func() outside test() w/o constructing the function
body
> in string texts, and use InspectorTest.waitForNthConsoleMessage()

just suggesting... otherwise lgtm

[kozyatinskiy1, 2014-07-17 12:45:34]

On 2014/07/17 12:31:58, aandrey wrote:
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/100001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
> File LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-exception-report.html (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/100001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
> LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-exception-report.html:21:
> InspectorTest.dumpConsoleMessages();
> On 2014/07/17 12:27:23, kozyatinskiy wrote:
> > On 2014/07/17 10:10:05, aandrey wrote:
> > > you could expand console messages first, and then dump together with the
> stack
> > > trace. e.g. see inspector/sources/debugger/async-callstack-in-console.html
> > 
> > I don't want dump all stack trace, because stack can contains some
> > implementation details, like:
> > InjectedScript._evaluateOn
> > InjectedScript._evaluateAndWrap
> > InjectedScript.evaluate
> 
> Yes, to avoid you can use InspectorTest.evaluateInConsole("setTimeout(func,
> 0)"), declare function func() outside test() w/o constructing the function
body
> in string texts, and use InspectorTest.waitForNthConsoleMessage()

Thank you. But we use different algorithms when processing exception in console
and after setTimeout call. After setTimeout we use handler in V8Initializer.

[vsevik, 2014-07-17 13:13:22]

Looks good to me, please fix tests and make sure pfeldman@ is fine with the
protocol change induced by the _createThrownValue change.

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/140001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
File LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-exception-report.html (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/140001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-exception-report.html:28:
InspectorTest.assertGreaterOrEqual(stackTrace.length, 3, 'Not complete stack
trace');
Please don't use assert in tests, dump the values instead.
Otherwise it is possible that this code becomes not reached at some point and
the test still passes.

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/140001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
File LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-throw-undefined-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/140001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-throw-undefined-expected.txt:4:
Uncaught undefined VM:2
Now that we have a non trivial behavior in case of different types of thrown
values we need the tests for them (throw 1, throw "string", throw {foo:42}, etc)

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/140001/Source/core/inspector/I...
File Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptSource.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/140001/Source/core/inspector/I...
Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptSource.js:684: _createThrownValue:
function(value, objectGroup, returnByValue, generatePreview, exceptionDetails)
I am not sure whether the changes we do here are safe for protocol.
Pavel, could you please have a look?

[kozyatinskiy1, 2014-07-17 14:02:51]

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/140001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
File LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-exception-report.html (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/140001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-exception-report.html:28:
InspectorTest.assertGreaterOrEqual(stackTrace.length, 3, 'Not complete stack
trace');
On 2014/07/17 13:13:22, vsevik wrote:
> Please don't use assert in tests, dump the values instead.
> Otherwise it is possible that this code becomes not reached at some point and
> the test still passes.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/140001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
File LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-throw-undefined-expected.txt
(right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/140001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-throw-undefined-expected.txt:4:
Uncaught undefined VM:2
On 2014/07/17 13:13:22, vsevik wrote:
> Now that we have a non trivial behavior in case of different types of thrown
> values we need the tests for them (throw 1, throw "string", throw {foo:42},
etc)

Done.

[vsevik, 2014-07-17 14:34:02]

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/160001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
File LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-exception-report.html (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/160001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-exception-report.html:29:
InspectorTest.addResult('FAILED: bad stack size');
Stack size too small

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/160001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-exception-report.html:40:
InspectorTest.addResult('frame function name:' + frame.functionName);
Let's put all of them on one line for better readability.
Call frame: foo at :4

[kozyatinskiy1, 2014-07-17 14:58:44]

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/160001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
File LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-exception-report.html (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/160001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-exception-report.html:29:
InspectorTest.addResult('FAILED: bad stack size');
On 2014/07/17 14:34:02, vsevik wrote:
> Stack size too small

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/160001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-exception-report.html:40:
InspectorTest.addResult('frame function name:' + frame.functionName);
On 2014/07/17 14:34:02, vsevik wrote:
> Let's put all of them on one line for better readability.
> Call frame: foo at :4

Done.

[kozyatinskiy1, 2014-07-18 08:35:10]

On 2014/07/17 14:58:44, kozyatinskiy wrote:
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/160001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
> File LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-exception-report.html (right):
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/160001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
> LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-exception-report.html:29:
> InspectorTest.addResult('FAILED: bad stack size');
> On 2014/07/17 14:34:02, vsevik wrote:
> > Stack size too small
> 
> Done.
> 
>
https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/160001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
> LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-exception-report.html:40:
> InspectorTest.addResult('frame function name:' + frame.functionName);
> On 2014/07/17 14:34:02, vsevik wrote:
> > Let's put all of them on one line for better readability.
> > Call frame: foo at :4
> 
> Done.

Added tests, changed _describe method. In case of Error this method return class
name + ":" + error.message.

[vsevik, 2014-07-18 14:41:06]

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/200001/LayoutTests/insp...
File LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-throw-expected.txt (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/200001/LayoutTests/insp...
LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-throw-expected.txt:4: Running:
testThrowUndefined
We should clear messages between tests in test suite.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/200001/Source/core/insp...
File Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptSource.js (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/200001/Source/core/insp...
Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptSource.js:1046: if (obj instanceof Error &&
!!obj.message)
Let's extract this change to a separate CL.

[kozyatinskiy1, 2014-07-18 16:10:09]

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/200001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
File LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-throw-expected.txt (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/200001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-throw-expected.txt:4: Running:
testThrowUndefined
On 2014/07/18 14:41:06, vsevik wrote:
> We should clear messages between tests in test suite.

Done.

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/200001/Source/core/inspector/I...
File Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptSource.js (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/200001/Source/core/inspector/I...
Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptSource.js:1046: if (obj instanceof Error &&
!!obj.message)
On 2014/07/18 14:41:06, vsevik wrote:
> Let's extract this change to a separate CL.

Done.

[vsevik, 2014-07-18 16:26:19]

lgtm

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/240001/LayoutTests/insp...
File LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-throw.html (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/240001/LayoutTests/insp...
LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-throw.html:12:
InspectorTest.runAfterPendingDispatches(next);
Let's listen for WebInspector.ConsoleModel.Events.ConsoleCleared instead.

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/240001/Source/core/insp...
File Source/core/inspector/InspectorDebuggerAgent.cpp (right):

https://chromiumcodereview.appspot.com/369333002/diff/240001/Source/core/insp...
Source/core/inspector/InspectorDebuggerAgent.cpp:962: // therefore contents of
the stack does not provide necessary information
Could you please file a crbug about that and send me a link? Thanks!

[kozyatinskiy1, 2014-07-18 16:43:17]

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/240001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
File LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-throw.html (right):

https://codereview.chromium.org/369333002/diff/240001/LayoutTests/inspector/c...
LayoutTests/inspector/console/console-eval-throw.html:12:
InspectorTest.runAfterPendingDispatches(next);
On 2014/07/18 16:26:19, vsevik wrote:
> Let's listen for WebInspector.ConsoleModel.Events.ConsoleCleared instead.

Done.

[vsevik, 2014-07-18 17:06:56]

The CQ bit was checked by vsevik@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-18 17:07:31]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/kozyatinskiy@google.com/369333002/260001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-18 17:07:49]

The CQ bit was unchecked by commit-bot@chromium.org

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-18 17:07:50]

Failed to apply patch for Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptSource.js:
While running patch -p1 --forward --force --no-backup-if-mismatch;
  patching file Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptSource.js
  Hunk #2 FAILED at 670.
  1 out of 2 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file
Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptSource.js.rej

Patch:       Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptSource.js
Index: Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptSource.js
diff --git a/Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptSource.js
b/Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptSource.js
index
0d03ec579e6dffe97cebc08ac3ee80efee84f3c8..77c1439c34247e6831b7ffc9fdd3cfe5214ae7b4
100644
--- a/Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptSource.js
+++ b/Source/core/inspector/InjectedScriptSource.js
@@ -617,7 +617,7 @@ InjectedScript.prototype = {
                      result: this._wrapObject(func.apply(object, resolvedArgs),
objectGroup, returnByValue),
                      __proto__: null };
         } catch (e) {
-            return this._createThrownValue(e, objectGroup);
+            return this._createThrownValue(e, objectGroup, false);
         }
     },
 
@@ -670,18 +670,19 @@ InjectedScript.prototype = {
                      result: this._wrapObject(wrappedResult.result,
objectGroup, returnByValue, generatePreview),
                      __proto__: null };
         }
-        return this._createThrownValue(wrappedResult.result, objectGroup,
wrappedResult.exceptionDetails);
+        return this._createThrownValue(wrappedResult.result, objectGroup,
generatePreview, wrappedResult.exceptionDetails);
     },
 
     /**
      * @param {*} value
      * @param {string} objectGroup
+     * @param {boolean} generatePreview
      * @param {!DebuggerAgent.ExceptionDetails=} exceptionDetails
      * @return {!Object}
      */
-    _createThrownValue: function(value, objectGroup, exceptionDetails)
+    _createThrownValue: function(value, objectGroup, generatePreview,
exceptionDetails)
     {
-        var remoteObject = this._wrapObject(value, objectGroup);
+        var remoteObject = this._wrapObject(value, objectGroup, false,
generatePreview && !(value instanceof Error));
         if (!remoteObject.description){
             try {
                 remoteObject.description = toStringDescription(value);

[kozyatinskiy1, 2014-07-18 17:31:24]

The CQ bit was checked by kozyatinskiy@google.com

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-18 17:31:48]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
 https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/kozyatinskiy@google.com/369333002/260001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2014-07-18 18:46:02]

Change committed as 178471