Re: EuGrid - was Runs w/Interpreter but not as .exe
I'm thinking that it would be provided in an alternate library file, eg.
win32lib.tew. That way one would be normally using the standard library but
if you need to, you could rename stuff to use the trace-enabled library,
with its overheads.
On Mon, 2 Dec 2002 13:08:44 +1100, <Patrick.Barnes at transgrid.com.au> wrote:
>
> I think it would be useful to everybody.
>
> As long as it did not place too high an overhead on anybody not using the
> function.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Derek Parnell [mailto:ddparnell at bigpond.com]
> Sent: Monday, 2 December 2002 13:04
> To: EUforum
> Subject: Re: EuGrid - was Runs w/Interpreter but not as .exe
>
>
> 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
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
