OpenEuphoria

Re: EuGrid - was Runs w/Interpreter but not as .exe

• Posted by Derek Parnell <ddparnell at bigpond.com> Dec 02, 2002
• 501 views

I could put in a type of trace mechanism into Win32lib that would work in 
bound and unbound programs.

Would this be a useful thing to anybody?


On Sun, 1 Dec 2002 21:02:22 -0500, <jbrown1050 at hotpop.com> wrote:

>
> On Sun, Dec 01, 2002 at 11:29:35PM -0000, tubby.toast at ntlworld.com wrote:
>>
>> I rarely come out of lurk mode and have been waiting for someone else to
>> suggest this and can't believe that no-one, even Rob, has.  Rename
>> machine.e
>> to something else; rename safe.e to machine.e and run your program
>> unbound.
>> I have always tracked down errors of this nature this way.  Not 
>> guaranteed
>> but worth a try.
>>
>> chris.
>>
>
> He already tried a similar trick, and it worked bound and unbounded i 
> think.
>
> In fact, using puts() in the right spots got it to work.
>
> A quick hack ... keep the puts() in the same spots, but change them to 
> output
> an empty string. Its a kludge, but it might work. Of course, it would be 
> nice
> to know why it worked tho. Personally, I think that odds are good if 
> trace()
> were available in bound mode, the program would automagically work 
> anyways. :(
>
> jbrown
>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Robert Craig" <rds at RapidEuphoria.com>
>> To: "EUforum" <EUforum at topica.com>
>> Sent: 01 December 2002 05:47
>> Subject: Re: EuGrid - was Runs w/Interpreter but not as .exe
>>
>>
>> > Jonas Temple writes:
>> > > In this case I'm really dead in the water, aren't I?  I have no way 
>> of
>> > > knowing where or why my program is crashing.  I even tried puts() 
>> and
>> > > flush() as you suggested.  When running the bound version with 
>> puts()
>> it
>> > > ran fine!  I'm starting to think that if I, as a programmer, want to
>> > > allow tracing of my bound program then that's my problem (unless the
>> > > security issue has to do with the internals of the interpreter).  
>> Why
>> > > can't this be an option when creating a bound program?
>> >
>> > I'll reconsider the security issue for 2.4.
>> > Meanwhile, if adding puts() made it work,
>> > then maybe adding a few more calls to puts()
>> > will make it crash again. Or switching the order of some
>> > includes, or just about anything.
>> >
>> > This is frustrating, but for C/C++ programmers
>> > this is very common. They recompile their program
>> > in debug mode and the crash goes away.
>> >
>> > Or maybe just relax, run it unbound for a while,
>> > and wait for a better opportunity to debug it.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >    Rob Craig
>> >    Rapid Deployment Software
>> >    http://www.RapidEuphoria.com
>> >
>> >
>
>
>



-- 

cheers,
Derek Parnell