Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.org!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder1.enfer-du-nord.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Ian Collins Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++ Subject: Re: c++ compiler Date: Sat, 06 Aug 2011 09:53:45 +1200 Lines: 27 Message-ID: <9a373aFuliU1@mid.individual.net> References: <59223312-c2e1-416f-b647-5d0df25bc2b8@f17g2000prf.googlegroups.com> <12ioeb0ubofum$.dlg@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net 0hwNff8eHW8krkK+I48ogwUsZE35LcVFHDBh29ZsA+h4FoGjU6 Cancel-Lock: sha1:g759R0QEN7/bvrqR2ZJGKLeWDGI= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; SunOS i86pc; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20101021 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.4 In-Reply-To: Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.c++:8497 On 08/ 5/11 11:58 PM, Victor Bazarov wrote: > On 8/5/2011 5:41 AM, Miles Bader wrote: >> [..] >> My general issue with the VS debugger was that very often there would >> be cases where you could _see_ interesting data, but not be able to >> manipulate it, or be able to manipulate it, but only rather awkwardly >> (o-n-e-s-t-e-p-a-t-a-t-i-m-e... argh!) For complex debugging tasks, >> this quickly became absolutely miserable >> >> With gdb, on the other hand, which is largely based on expression >> evaluation, while it was harder to visualize data, manipulation of it >> was vastly faster and easier (and more easily repeatable; often one >> wants to do the weird manipulation several times). > > In other words, with VC++'s debugger you're actually deBUGging, finding > out what's wrong, one step at a time, stopping to think, exiting to > change the code, compile, run again, etc.. With gdb you're actually > developing by tweaking the data, tweaking the program, altering > execution, etc.. Yes, no, maybe? It's a style debate, not the quality > of tools debate. If you need a debugger, your unit tests aren't good enough! Dives for cover :) -- Ian Collins