OpenEuphoria

Re: BREAKing into Euphoria

• Posted by Andy Drummond <andy at ?estrelt?le.com> Sep 12, 2007
• 2531 views

Matt Lewis wrote:
> 
> 
> Yes, the problem, as you previously sorta mentioned, is that windows creates
> a new thread and uses that thread to call the handler.  It's probably 
> fairly straightforward to manage this in a thread-safe way within the 
> C-backend, but I don't see a nice way to do this in a purely Eu-based
> fashion.
> 
> I think the way to go is to use trace(3) (was about to post it until I
> noticed that Rob beat me to it).
> 
> As for having to put "with trace" everywhere:  You'd have to do this 
> regardless (the top of your main would work, unless you have any
> "without trace" statements elsewhere in your code.  Otherwise, Euphoria
> doesn't generate the IL that drives the trace screen.
> 
> trace(3) is clearly the way to go.  Let it run for a while, and check out
> the file.  It should be numbingly repetitive if you're really in an 
> infinite loop.  You may want/need to "without trace" some library routines
> to cut down on the noise.  Even better, only enable tracing in routines
> that use while or for loops.  You could probably make an automated tool
> to insert/remove the with/without statements, assuming you've got a lot
> of code/files to deal with.
> 
> Matt

Yes, I am pretty sure I'm going to have to do just that. I suppose with
a fairly quick PC even trace(3) shouldn't make it unusable. I may create
a mind-blowingly enormous file, though, unless Rob has been especially
clever.
I will let you know how that pans out...

Andy