digitalmars.D.debugger - ddbg suggestion
- bobef (1/1) Apr 03 2007 The debugee's output must be distinguished from the debuggers's output b...
- Jascha Wetzel (6/7) Apr 04 2007 you can use the "nc" command before starting the debuggee to make ddbg
- bobef (2/10) Apr 04 2007
- Jascha Wetzel (4/18) Apr 04 2007 ok, to be sure, i'll make the prefix configurable.
- Jascha Wetzel (6/25) Apr 04 2007 hm, i guess i misunderstood you.
- bobef (2/30) Apr 04 2007
- Jascha Wetzel (10/43) Apr 04 2007 one could use named pipes or simply control the debugger through an API
- Frits van Bommel (7/25) Apr 04 2007 Note that in your earlier message you seemed to think he wanted a prefix...
- Jascha Wetzel (3/9) Apr 04 2007 yep, took me some time to realize that ;)
- Frits van Bommel (2/12) Apr 04 2007 Yeah, you beat me to posting that by a couple of minutes :).
- Ary Manzana (39/40) Apr 20 2007 Another suggestions: a) allow the debugger to run in "for non-human"
- Jascha Wetzel (5/68) Apr 21 2007 the answer ends when "->" on a single line is printed. that should also
- Ary Manzana (5/11) Apr 23 2007 Great!! Then I'll stop working on the debugger interface for Descent and...
The debugee's output must be distinguished from the debuggers's output by prefix or something. Otherwise it is impossible for non-human to say which one is which. A single character would do nicely.
Apr 03 2007
you can use the "nc" command before starting the debuggee to make ddbg open a new console for it. i think that's the best solution for that problem. no prefix can be unique and it's a lot more readable to separate the ouput properly. i will still consider adding a prefix as an option if there is need for it. bobef wrote:The debugee's output must be distinguished from the debuggers's output by prefix or something. Otherwise it is impossible for non-human to say which one is which. A single character would do nicely.
Apr 04 2007
There is need. To create a font end the two things must be separated. Also the prefix don't have to be "unique", it just have to be something that is different from the debugger's output. Say the debugee's output is prefixed with something other). So when the line begins with $ just strip the $ and the rest is debugee's output, otherwise it is debugger's. Jascha Wetzel <[firstname] mainia.de> Wrote:you can use the "nc" command before starting the debuggee to make ddbg open a new console for it. i think that's the best solution for that problem. no prefix can be unique and it's a lot more readable to separate the ouput properly. i will still consider adding a prefix as an option if there is need for it. bobef wrote:The debugee's output must be distinguished from the debuggers's output by prefix or something. Otherwise it is impossible for non-human to say which one is which. A single character would do nicely.
Apr 04 2007
ok, to be sure, i'll make the prefix configurable. personally, i use a new console when using Code::Blocks as a front end. i wonder if a that ouput could be redirected to a front end as well. bobef wrote:There is need. To create a font end the two things must be separated. Also the prefix don't have to be "unique", it just have to be something that is different from the debugger's output. Say the debugee's output is prefixed with something other). So when the line begins with $ just strip the $ and the rest is debugee's output, otherwise it is debugger's. Jascha Wetzel <[firstname] mainia.de> Wrote:you can use the "nc" command before starting the debuggee to make ddbg open a new console for it. i think that's the best solution for that problem. no prefix can be unique and it's a lot more readable to separate the ouput properly. i will still consider adding a prefix as an option if there is need for it. bobef wrote:The debugee's output must be distinguished from the debuggers's output by prefix or something. Otherwise it is impossible for non-human to say which one is which. A single character would do nicely.
Apr 04 2007
hm, i guess i misunderstood you. prefixing the debuggee's output requires intercepting it's output, which is not a good idea. prefixing the debugger's output isn't unambiguous, since the debuggee can always use the same prefix. therefore, the best solution is to separate the two output streams by using different consoles, as implemented by the "nc" command. i'd recommend that you consider using this solution. as i said, i can add a configurable prefix for the debugger's output, but that's pretty hacky, imho. Jascha Wetzel <[firstname] mainia.de> Wrote:ok, to be sure, i'll make the prefix configurable. personally, i use a new console when using Code::Blocks as a front end. i wonder if a that ouput could be redirected to a front end as well. bobef wrote:There is need. To create a font end the two things must be separated. Also the prefix don't have to be "unique", it just have to be something that is different from the debugger's output. Say the debugee's output is prefixed with something other). So when the line begins with $ just strip the $ and the rest is debugee's output, otherwise it is debugger's. Jascha Wetzel <[firstname] mainia.de> Wrote:you can use the "nc" command before starting the debuggee to make ddbg open a new console for it. i think that's the best solution for that problem. no prefix can be unique and it's a lot more readable to separate the ouput properly. i will still consider adding a prefix as an option if there is need for it. bobef wrote:The debugee's output must be distinguished from the debuggers's output by prefix or something. Otherwise it is impossible for non-human to say which one is which. A single character would do nicely.
Apr 04 2007
I see. Then how to get the both outputs to the front end and let it know which one is which? Jascha Wetzel Wrote:hm, i guess i misunderstood you. prefixing the debuggee's output requires intercepting it's output, which is not a good idea. prefixing the debugger's output isn't unambiguous, since the debuggee can always use the same prefix. therefore, the best solution is to separate the two output streams by using different consoles, as implemented by the "nc" command. i'd recommend that you consider using this solution. as i said, i can add a configurable prefix for the debugger's output, but that's pretty hacky, imho. Jascha Wetzel <[firstname] mainia.de> Wrote:ok, to be sure, i'll make the prefix configurable. personally, i use a new console when using Code::Blocks as a front end. i wonder if a that ouput could be redirected to a front end as well. bobef wrote:There is need. To create a font end the two things must be separated. Also the prefix don't have to be "unique", it just have to be something that is different from the debugger's output. Say the debugee's output is prefixed with something other). So when the line begins with $ just strip the $ and the rest is debugee's output, otherwise it is debugger's. Jascha Wetzel <[firstname] mainia.de> Wrote:you can use the "nc" command before starting the debuggee to make ddbg open a new console for it. i think that's the best solution for that problem. no prefix can be unique and it's a lot more readable to separate the ouput properly. i will still consider adding a prefix as an option if there is need for it. bobef wrote:The debugee's output must be distinguished from the debuggers's output by prefix or something. Otherwise it is impossible for non-human to say which one is which. A single character would do nicely.
Apr 04 2007
Jascha Wetzel <"[firstname]" mainia.de> one could use named pipes or simply control the debugger through an API instead of a CLI. i've just looked at the GDB/MI specs, they also require the debugger to prefix the debuggee's output. GDB/MI appears to not distinguish stdout and stderr output, though. personally i feel that using a separate pair of IO streams (or an API) for controlling the debugger would be nicer. but since i will implement GDB/MI for compatibility reasons anyway, the effort of implementing an alternative approach won't be worthwhile. bobef wrote:I see. Then how to get the both outputs to the front end and let it know which one is which? Jascha Wetzel Wrote:hm, i guess i misunderstood you. prefixing the debuggee's output requires intercepting it's output, which is not a good idea. prefixing the debugger's output isn't unambiguous, since the debuggee can always use the same prefix. therefore, the best solution is to separate the two output streams by using different consoles, as implemented by the "nc" command. i'd recommend that you consider using this solution. as i said, i can add a configurable prefix for the debugger's output, but that's pretty hacky, imho. Jascha Wetzel <[firstname] mainia.de> Wrote:ok, to be sure, i'll make the prefix configurable. personally, i use a new console when using Code::Blocks as a front end. i wonder if a that ouput could be redirected to a front end as well. bobef wrote:There is need. To create a font end the two things must be separated. Also the prefix don't have to be "unique", it just have to be something that is different from the debugger's output. Say the debugee's output is prefixed with something other). So when the line begins with $ just strip the $ and the rest is debugee's output, otherwise it is debugger's. Jascha Wetzel <[firstname] mainia.de> Wrote:you can use the "nc" command before starting the debuggee to make ddbg open a new console for it. i think that's the best solution for that problem. no prefix can be unique and it's a lot more readable to separate the ouput properly. i will still consider adding a prefix as an option if there is need for it. bobef wrote:The debugee's output must be distinguished from the debuggers's output by prefix or something. Otherwise it is impossible for non-human to say which one is which. A single character would do nicely.
Apr 04 2007
Jascha Wetzel wrote:ok, to be sure, i'll make the prefix configurable. personally, i use a new console when using Code::Blocks as a front end. i wonder if a that ouput could be redirected to a front end as well. bobef wrote:Note that in your earlier message you seemed to think he wanted a prefix on the output of the debugger, but he meant the _debuggee_. Just in case you missed that. This shouldn't be a problem, since presumably you (as the author of the debugger) have control over what messages the debugger itself generates and can ensure it never starts with the chosen prefix?There is need. To create a font end the two things must be separated. Also the prefix don't have to be "unique", it just have to be something that is different from the debugger's output. Say the debugee's output is prefixed with something other). So when the line begins with $ just strip the $ and the rest is debugee's output, otherwise it is debugger's. Jascha Wetzel <[firstname] mainia.de> Wrote:you can use the "nc" command before starting the debuggee to make ddbg open a new console for it. i think that's the best solution for that problem. no prefix can be unique and it's a lot more readable to separate the ouput properly. i will still consider adding a prefix as an option if there is need for it. bobef wrote:The debugee's output must be distinguished from the debuggers's output by prefix or something. Otherwise it is impossible for non-human to say which one is which. A single character would do nicely.
Apr 04 2007
Frits van Bommel wrote:Note that in your earlier message you seemed to think he wanted a prefix on the output of the debugger, but he meant the _debuggee_. Just in case you missed that. This shouldn't be a problem, since presumably you (as the author of the debugger) have control over what messages the debugger itself generates and can ensure it never starts with the chosen prefix?yep, took me some time to realize that ;) see my other post for the problem with this.
Apr 04 2007
Jascha Wetzel wrote:Frits van Bommel wrote:Yeah, you beat me to posting that by a couple of minutes :).Note that in your earlier message you seemed to think he wanted a prefix on the output of the debugger, but he meant the _debuggee_. Just in case you missed that. This shouldn't be a problem, since presumably you (as the author of the debugger) have control over what messages the debugger itself generates and can ensure it never starts with the chosen prefix?yep, took me some time to realize that ;) see my other post for the problem with this.
Apr 04 2007
bobef escribió:The debugee's output must be distinguished from the debuggers's output by prefix or something. Otherwise it is impossible for non-human to say which one is which. A single character would do nicely.Another suggestions: a) allow the debugger to run in "for non-human" mode (with a flag), and b) to be able to specify two local ports on the machine, one to send requests, the other to recieve answers. This way: a) The UI (or any program) can communicate with the debugger in a more "computer", efficient way. For example for a human the stack frame currently is shown like this: address, the last three don't have a line number or filename, etc. In the "non-human" mode they could be shown like this: // number, address, function, filename, line number (other parameters?) 0, , main.bla1, main.d, 9 1, 0x004027a4, _main, dmain2 2, 0x0040ab05, _mainCRTStartup, 3, 0x7c816fd7, ??, (I currently don't use the other parameters, all of these would have to be defined properly, but you get the point) Another example: when a breakpoint is set, you get the answer "Breakpoint set: main.d:9 0x402038"; when a breakpoint is hit, you get "Breakpoint 0 hit at main.d:9 0x402038". Again, they could be simpler to understand. Yet another improvement: in the case of a breakpoint hit you just get: Breakpoint 0 hit at main.d:9 0x402038 void bla1(int x) { In the case of requesting the stack frame, the last line is "->". There is no "standard" way the debugger is saying "here ends my answer". Each kind of answer line should start with a different symbol or letter, and another symbol should be used for "answer end". b) The debuggers output is *just* the program's output (it dosen't interfere with the commands sent to the debugger and recieved from it), which is very suitable for showing in a console. The point b) is used in Eclipse for the Java debugger, as well as in their example "How to Write an Eclipse debugger": http://www.eclipse.org/articles/Article-Debugger/how-to.html Well... just thoughts. :-)
Apr 20 2007
Another suggestions: a) allow the debugger to run in "for non-human" mode (with a flag), and b) to be able to specify two local ports on the machine, one to send requests, the other to recieve answers. This way:i'm planning on adding GDB/MI support in one of the next releases. i'll also add TCP sockets for interfacing then.In the case of requesting the stack frame, the last line is "->". There is no "standard" way the debugger is saying "here ends my answer". Each kind of answer line should start with a different symbol or letter, and another symbol should be used for "answer end".the answer ends when "->" on a single line is printed. that should also be the case for when breakpoints are hit. Ary Manzana wrote:bobef escribió:The debugee's output must be distinguished from the debuggers's output by prefix or something. Otherwise it is impossible for non-human to say which one is which. A single character would do nicely.Another suggestions: a) allow the debugger to run in "for non-human" mode (with a flag), and b) to be able to specify two local ports on the machine, one to send requests, the other to recieve answers. This way: a) The UI (or any program) can communicate with the debugger in a more "computer", efficient way. For example for a human the stack frame currently is shown like this: address, the last three don't have a line number or filename, etc. In the "non-human" mode they could be shown like this: // number, address, function, filename, line number (other parameters?) 0, , main.bla1, main.d, 9 1, 0x004027a4, _main, dmain2 2, 0x0040ab05, _mainCRTStartup, 3, 0x7c816fd7, ??, (I currently don't use the other parameters, all of these would have to be defined properly, but you get the point) Another example: when a breakpoint is set, you get the answer "Breakpoint set: main.d:9 0x402038"; when a breakpoint is hit, you get "Breakpoint 0 hit at main.d:9 0x402038". Again, they could be simpler to understand. Yet another improvement: in the case of a breakpoint hit you just get: Breakpoint 0 hit at main.d:9 0x402038 void bla1(int x) { In the case of requesting the stack frame, the last line is "->". There is no "standard" way the debugger is saying "here ends my answer". Each kind of answer line should start with a different symbol or letter, and another symbol should be used for "answer end". b) The debuggers output is *just* the program's output (it dosen't interfere with the commands sent to the debugger and recieved from it), which is very suitable for showing in a console. The point b) is used in Eclipse for the Java debugger, as well as in their example "How to Write an Eclipse debugger": http://www.eclipse.org/articles/Article-Debugger/how-to.html Well... just thoughts. :-)
Apr 21 2007
Jascha Wetzel escribió:Great!! Then I'll stop working on the debugger interface for Descent and wait for that, since there is no point in killing myself parsing things that will change in a few releases. Really appreciated! :-)Another suggestions: a) allow the debugger to run in "for non-human" mode (with a flag), and b) to be able to specify two local ports on the machine, one to send requests, the other to recieve answers. This way:i'm planning on adding GDB/MI support in one of the next releases. i'll also add TCP sockets for interfacing then.
Apr 23 2007