Re: BREAKing into Euphoria
- Posted by Andy Drummond <andy at kestreltele.co?> Sep 11, 2007
- 2115 views
Salix wrote: > > Andy Drummond wrote: > > Has anyone done this, or is there any reason why it is > > not really practical? > > Usullay my scripts run faster than I can press Break. > > Adding a trace(1) line to my code always worked fine. > If I wasn't sure where to put it I simply added a > trace_if_timeout(60) routine to the most suspicious > loops. > > Regards, > > Salix Ah, but I have this enormous program and somewhere, somehow, it is locking up in a loop. If I went around putting in timeouts & traces I'd take longer than modifying the source for the interpreter and recompiling it and using a ctl-C or whatever. No, what I *need* is a way of getting the interpreter to enter its trace routine from keyboard use and not from trace(). Even then it is a problem because it is likely the program is not looking at the keyboard, so the interpreter would have to go check the keyboard itself for a break character. Apart from all that, it is likely that the loop is not supposed to be a loop anyway, so I wouldn't know to trace it. This is the ultimate cock-up cracker. I could use the profiler if I could get the program to stop cleanly rather than saying "This program is not responding - terminate anyway (Y/N)" which dumps anything it had available into a black hole. So thanks anyway, but - I need to ask the question again. Andy