RE: Routine_ID Is No Doubt My Solution...
- Posted by rforno at tutopia.com
Apr 17, 2003
----- Original Message -----
From: Pete Lomax <petelomax at blueyonder.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Routine_ID Is No Doubt My Solution...
On Tue, 15 Apr 2003 15:30:21 +1000, Derek Parnell
<ddparnell at bigpond.com> wrote:
<snip>
The debugger should allow a "permanent view" to be defined - not as it
stands overwrite randomly/sequentially those variables you are
interested in tracking with "fluff"; eg for i=1 to 10; you *know*
what i is, cause you're single-stepping the loop; when it blats the
current value of i over a value you are waiting to see go wrong, it's
a pain, 'cos you have to "?" it again to get it back on the screen.
Some kind of ini file, only read when the debug/trace window opens?
The debugger is smart enough to cope if I define some variable such as
"result" which is not in scope at the trap point & say "<undefined>"
I think the solution is simpler than that, Pete. I already proposed to Rob
that the trace window should show only the variables you select, insted of
trace() selecting them. The typing effort would be very small: only a ? and
the variable name. And it would work with the current way of doing things
with only a minimum modification.
The other one I'd vote for is viewing the *end* of a large sequence in
the permitted 80-char view. I know 2.4 allows you to see the whole
thing, but when you are single-stepping through, waiting for it to go
wrong...
I agree, Pete.
Pete
==^^===============================================================
This email was sent to: rforno at tutopia.com
TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE!
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
