At 06:01 AM 6/23/02 -0500, David T-G wrote: >% Would you like tracing that goes off when you go into a function? Suppose >% if you gave a numeric argument to 't' it would trace up to that depth >% in subroutine calls beneath the current level but not beneath? That >% might be doable (as a patch to the debugger). > >Hmmm... That's a pretty attractive idea, actually.
I'll see if I can whack it out. 'Course, it won't show up in an actual release until 5.8.1, since 5.8.0 is on the verge of release. > The point of -x, >which certainly isn't much for one used to a debugger, is simply to print >out each command that goes on and, as a bonus, see the values the script >has at the time, and it's expected that you just dump that (stderr) off >to a file and peruse it at leisure. The problem I've always had with a >debugger is that you have to set breakpoints or step through EVERY SINGLE >BLASTED STEP in order to see what's going on, and you want to not descend >too far down into functions and such, and you still have to print values >when you want to see how they're set at the time. Hey, I have a class on how to use the debugger. The last time I gave it was on the Perl Whirl cruise in the Caribbean. Where were you? :-) To not step every statement: mostly, use 'n' instead of 's'. Get a quick window on the source with 'w' and skip ahead with 'c <line>'. To get out of the current subroutine, use 'r'. To print values automatically, or even conditionally, use actions. To break at a loop statement part way through the loop, use conditional breakpoints. -- Peter Scott Pacific Systems Design Technologies http://www.perldebugged.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
