Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools?

From	anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl)
Newsgroups	comp.lang.forth
Subject	Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools?
Date	2012-07-13 13:43 +0000
Organization	Institut fuer Computersprachen, Technische Universitaet Wien
Message-ID	<2012Jul13.154359@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at> (permalink)
References	<2ea8a4ce-4bd0-4fd6-a19f-81f0f073dd18@re8g2000pbc.googlegroups.com> <ad37fddb-d708-48cc-a4ba-9e95efe1cd7e@googlegroups.com> <e-mdneOcBvz4mmPSnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d@supernews.com> <c377fdca-eaa6-424e-8111-9c99ffe4ed4c@googlegroups.com> <jtngr6$cp4$2@online.de>

Show all headers | View raw

Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> writes:
>mhx@iae.nl wrote:
>> In iForth I have a word "^^" which, when inserted in the code, prints
>> filename and line number, dumps all stack (including a return stack
>> trace) and waits for a key press. It saves huge amounts of time.
>
>In Gforth, we have ~~, which is similar, but apart from file+line number 
>(and position within the line) it only prints the stack (no return 
>stack, no floating point stack), and it doesn't wait.

Actually you can determine what it prints through the deferred word
PRINTDEBUGDATA (which performs .S by default).

- anton
-- 
M. Anton Ertl  http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html
     New standard: http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x.html
   EuroForth 2012: http://www.euroforth.org/ef12/

Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Why not more 'advanced' tools? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2012-07-11 11:10 -0700
  Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools? mhx@iae.nl - 2012-07-11 15:45 -0700
    Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-07-11 13:08 -1000
      Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools? mhx@iae.nl - 2012-07-11 16:39 -0700
        Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-07-11 14:00 -1000
          Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools? Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2012-07-11 19:41 -0700
            Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools? Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-07-11 22:22 -0700
              Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-07-12 01:31 -0700
              Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools? Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> - 2012-07-13 01:52 +0000
            Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-07-11 20:43 -1000
              Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools? Roelf Toxopeus <rt4all@notthis.hetnet.nl> - 2012-07-12 12:05 +0200
                Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools? Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2012-07-12 16:25 +0200
        Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools? Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2012-07-12 23:50 +0200
          Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools? anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2012-07-13 13:43 +0000
    Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools? vandys@vsta.org - 2012-07-12 00:29 +0000
  Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools? Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-07-11 22:13 -0700
    Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools? Mark Wills <markrobertwills@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-07-12 01:29 -0700
      Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools? Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-07-12 02:09 -0700
  Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools? Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2012-07-12 07:17 -0500
    Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools? Fanzo <cristianof6@gmail.com> - 2012-07-12 20:19 +0200
      Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools? "Elizabeth D. Rather" <erather@forth.com> - 2012-07-12 08:45 -1000
      Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools? stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2012-07-12 19:47 +0000
      Re: Why not more 'advanced' tools? Hugh Aguilar <hughaguilar96@yahoo.com> - 2012-07-12 14:54 -0700

csiph-web