Re: c++ compiler

From	"Waldek M." <wm@localhost.localdomain>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c++
Subject	Re: c++ compiler
Date	2011-08-05 21:30 +0200
Organization	Mojito.pl
Message-ID	<17i82i8czuxb8.dlg@localhost.localdomain> (permalink)
References	(3 earlier) <j1fjli$7ea$2@speranza.aioe.org> <buo1ux0fl9o.fsf@dhlpc061.dev.necel.com> <j1gcc0$lbg$1@news.albasani.net> <buosjpgdwlq.fsf@dhlpc061.dev.necel.com> <j1glta$sql$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 07:58:34 -0400, Victor Bazarov wrote:
> 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.

Well, since I've started this off-topic... :-)

I love gdb on Linux. If I need GUI for it, I'll always find
one. I don't use VC's debugger - but what I heard from my colleagues
is all good. But I must say, I'm not always happy with gdb on Windows.

It's fine, all right. But I can't really rely on it while debugging
anything built with VC. Moreover, gdb uses concepts that
make great sense on Unix (like pid and attaching to it)
but not so much on Windows.
So while I strongly prefer gdb - and not for altering the 
code flow, but just for simple debugging tasks like breakpoints,
watches, running some commands on watches' hit, inspecting backtraces
 - I definitely understand why my admiration is rare ;-)

Best regards,
Waldek

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