• Piotrek <starpit tlen.pl> Sep 14 2008
• Piotrek <starpit tlen.pl> Sep 16 2008
• Sean Kelly <sean invisibleduck.org> Sep 16 2008
• Lars Ivar Igesund <larsivar igesund.net> Sep 17 2008
• Piotrek <starpit tlen.pl> Sep 17 2008
• Piotrek <starpit tlen.pl> Sep 17 2008
• =?UTF-8?B?QW5kZXJzIEYgQmrDtnJrbHVuZA==?= <afb algonet.se> Sep 18 2008

Piotrek <starpit tlen.pl> writes:

Actually I prefer linux programming over windows so I would be happy if
there's a debugger which works there. Let's see what is situation 
according to http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?DebugEnvironments

For now on linux there's only gdb and zerobugs. Gdb works only with gdc 
(although doesn't show d arrays). Zerobugs looks better but doesn't work 
with more complex code (abnormal exits).

Any chance to see dedicated debugger for D on linux?

Piotrek <starpit tlen.pl> writes:

And I have another question to linux users. What debugger do you use? If 
non, also let me know please. I have a strange feeling that programming 
with dmd on linux means no debugger usage.

Maybe somebody made ZeroBugs work well? And maybe there're more pros of 
using gdc on linux rather than dmd?

Sean Kelly <sean invisibleduck.org> writes:

Piotrek wrote:
 And I have another question to linux users. What debugger do you use? If 
 non, also let me know please. I have a strange feeling that programming 
 with dmd on linux means no debugger usage.


I don't debug on linux much myself, but I believe people typically use 
gdb with a demangle patch.  There are a ton of graphical front-ends for 
gdb as well.

 Maybe somebody made ZeroBugs work well? And maybe there're more pros of 
 using gdc on linux rather than dmd?


Last I heard, ZeroBugs support for D was still pretty sparse.  But I 
can't recall what worked and what didn't.


Sean

Lars Ivar Igesund <larsivar igesund.net> writes:

Sean Kelly wrote:

 Piotrek wrote:
 And I have another question to linux users. What debugger do you use? If
 non, also let me know please. I have a strange feeling that programming
 with dmd on linux means no debugger usage.


 I don't debug on linux much myself, but I believe people typically use
 gdb with a demangle patch.  There are a ton of graphical front-ends for
 gdb as well.
 
 Maybe somebody made ZeroBugs work well? And maybe there're more pros of
 using gdc on linux rather than dmd?


 Last I heard, ZeroBugs support for D was still pretty sparse.  But I
 can't recall what worked and what didn't.
 


I've used ZeroBugs with success and found it much better than GDB, but I
hear not all like the closed source approach.

-- 
Lars Ivar Igesund
blog at http://larsivi.net
DSource, #d.tango & #D: larsivi
Dancing the Tango

Piotrek <starpit tlen.pl> writes:

Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
 I've used ZeroBugs with success and found it much better than GDB, but I
 hear not all like the closed source approach.
 


Last question here. Executables were DMD or GDC products? I find 
Zerobugs better too (I have nothing against closed source as far as it 
doesn't act as trojan), but form me it isn't stable with DMD output. I 
mean only works with simple code.

Piotrek <starpit tlen.pl> writes:

Sean Kelly pisze:
 I don't debug on linux much myself, but I believe people typically use 
 gdb with a demangle patch.  There are a ton of graphical front-ends for 
 gdb as well.
 


I've tried gdb witout the patch (on the gdc executables) and it didn't 
show D arrays correctly (the pointer and the array length as you can 
guess). I wasn't a complex code neither. It seems I have to try with the 
patch some day.

=?UTF-8?B?QW5kZXJzIEYgQmrDtnJrbHVuZA==?= <afb algonet.se> writes:

Piotrek wrote:
 And I have another question to linux users. What debugger do you use?If 
 non, also let me know please. I have a strange feeling that programming 
 with dmd on linux means no debugger usage.


gdb || printf

--anders