• =?iso-8859-1?Q?Robert_M._M=FCnch?= (13/13) May 19 2019 I use debug(...) specifications on my code. My app works when compiled
• =?iso-8859-1?Q?Robert_M._M=FCnch?= (14/27) May 19 2019 Solved... or better demiystified. The behaviour was a combination of

=?iso-8859-1?Q?Robert_M._M=FCnch?= <robert.muench saphirion.com> writes:

I use debug(...) specifications on my code. My app works when compiled 
in debug mode.

When I compile in release mode and explicitly use:

debug = debugprints;

on module level, my understanding is, that the debug guarded code will 
be included. But, some debug guarded code is include and some not... 
which is very strange. Because I expected to have the code either in or 
out.

Did anyone saw such a behaviour in the past?

-- 
Robert M. Münch
http://www.saphirion.com
smarter | better | faster

=?iso-8859-1?Q?Robert_M._M=FCnch?= <robert.muench saphirion.com> writes:

On 2019-05-19 13:13:16 +0000, Robert M. Münch said:

 I use debug(...) specifications on my code. My app works when compiled 
 in debug mode.
 
 When I compile in release mode and explicitly use:
 
 debug = debugprints;
 
 on module level, my understanding is, that the debug guarded code will 
 be included. But, some debug guarded code is include and some not... 
 which is very strange. Because I expected to have the code either in or 
 out.
 
 Did anyone saw such a behaviour in the past?

Solved... or better demiystified. The behaviour was a combination of 
strange things:

1. I used a lib that works in debug version but gives a different 
result in release version.

2. Because of the difference results some objects were missplaced on 
screen and had a width of 0

3. Because of this it was impossible to click on them, instead a 
container catched the click which didn't print anything

Lesson learned...

-- 
Robert M. Münch
http://www.saphirion.com
smarter | better | faster