Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #8499

Re: c++ compiler

Show key headers only | View raw

On 08/ 6/11 10:10 AM, BGB wrote:
> On 8/5/2011 2:53 PM, Ian Collins wrote:
>> 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 :)
>>
>
> unit tests wont help finding out where and why one is experiencing a
> segfault or similar...

If a change causes a crash, back it out and try again...

-- 
Ian Collins

Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

c++ compiler krishnakanth <kmanivan82@gmail.com> - 2011-08-03 13:34 -0700
  Re: c++ compiler Victor Bazarov <v.bazarov@comcast.invalid> - 2011-08-03 17:11 -0400
    Re: c++ compiler "Waldek M." <wm@localhost.localdomain> - 2011-08-04 21:40 +0200
      Re: c++ compiler BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-04 15:06 -0700
      Re: c++ compiler Qi <no@no.no> - 2011-08-05 10:14 +0800
        Re: c++ compiler Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> - 2011-08-05 15:02 +0900
          Re: c++ compiler BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-05 02:11 -0700
            Re: c++ compiler Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> - 2011-08-05 18:41 +0900
              Re: c++ compiler Victor Bazarov <v.bazarov@comcast.invalid> - 2011-08-05 07:58 -0400
                Re: c++ compiler "Waldek M." <wm@localhost.localdomain> - 2011-08-05 21:30 +0200
                Re: c++ compiler Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-06 09:53 +1200
                Re: c++ compiler BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-05 15:10 -0700
                Re: c++ compiler Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-06 10:20 +1200
                Re: c++ compiler BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-05 18:30 -0700
                Re: c++ compiler Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-06 15:25 +1200
                Re: c++ compiler Dombo <dombo@disposable.invalid> - 2011-08-06 10:42 +0200
                Re: c++ compiler Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-06 21:42 +1200
                Re: c++ compiler Dombo <dombo@disposable.invalid> - 2011-08-06 15:38 +0200
                Re: c++ compiler BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-06 11:58 -0700
                Re: c++ compiler yatremblay@bel1lin202.(none) (Yannick Tremblay) - 2011-08-09 13:28 +0000
                Re: c++ compiler Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-07 08:33 +1200
              Re: c++ compiler BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-05 12:34 -0700
  Re: c++ compiler "Mel Smith" <med_cutout_syntel@aol.com> - 2011-08-05 15:13 -0600

csiph-web