On Sat, 14 Sep 2013 10:30:09 -0700
"H. S. Teoh" <hst...@quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 02:25:43PM +0200, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
> >
> > Give me a way to writeln the callstack frames at a certain point,
> > and I'll take that: until this, I still need a debugger for
> > following the program flow.
>
> I'm pretty sure this is possible with a little effort.
> [...]
> Still, if there was a way to print a stacktrace *without* terminating
> the program, that would be an invaluable addition to our toolset.
Although I haven't actually hit a need to try, can't you just do this?:
writeln(new Exception("TRACE"));
Or at the very least this:
// Or make this a string mixin if you *really* don't
// want printStackTrace itself shown in the trace.
void printStackTrace()
{
try
throw new Exception("TRACE");
catch(Exception e)
writeln(e);
}
>
>
> > And no, adding a writeln everywhere you call that function is not a
> > solution.
> [...]
>
> True, this is one of the weak points of writeln debugging. Though I
> usually start from the top-level, so generally by the time I get to a
> specific function I already know how it got there.
>
Same here. I writeln-debug the way you'd play that "hi-lo" number
guessing game:
1-100: 50
lower
1-100: 25
higher
1-100: 40
higher
1-100: 45
lower
1-100: 43
lower
1-100: 42
It took you that long to guess 42? Really? What kind of nerd are you?
Only I make a lot more than one guess at a time.
