1. Request For Feature
- Posted by useless_ Jan 03, 2013
- 1053 views
Can the debugger stop on the line with "trace(x)" in it, instead of the next line? Then <enter> or <down> can go to the next executeable line normally.
useless
2. Re: Request For Feature
- Posted by bugmagnet Jan 03, 2013
- 1048 views
Can the debugger stop on the line with "trace(x)" in it, instead of the next line? Then <enter> or <down> can go to the next executeable line normally.
Why do you want that? I fancy it's possible, but as "trace" puts one into trace-mode, it seems a little odd that one should want to stop on the trace-starting line.
Bugmagnet
3. Re: Request For Feature
- Posted by useless_ Jan 03, 2013
- 1029 views
Can the debugger stop on the line with "trace(x)" in it, instead of the next line? Then <enter> or <down> can go to the next executeable line normally.
Why do you want that? I fancy it's possible, but as "trace" puts one into trace-mode, it seems a little odd that one should want to stop on the trace-starting line.
Bugmagnet
Because there may be many lines after the trace line that are not executeable, and in debugging you could have a set of puts() lines, followed by a trace to hold up execution. If the debugger does not stop on the trace line, you can't see the puts() lines in the debugger window, and it seems to me you should be able to, because they were the last lines executed. Instead, the debugger is skipped ahead to the next executeable.
If the last line in a program is the trace line, because you want to see the last results of the previous line, you can't, the program aborts as if the trace line wasn't there. I have taken to adding a "junk = junk" line after trace lines.
useless
