> I could try GHC's new debugger. But my experiences with it so far have > shown that for all but the most trivial programs possible, it becomes > intractably difficult to figure out what the debugger is actually > showing you.
GDB is to C as (a) GHCi debugger :: Haskell (b) Pigs :: Farmers (c) Food :: TomMD (d) None of the above Hint: Its not (a). The GHCi debugger seems to catch extra flack because people want to pour through their Haskell code as they do imperative code. I can sympathize - I would like to do that too - but it would be an inaccurate picture of the programs execution. so long as you regard the GHCi as a new/useful tool and not try to pretend its like other debuggers you'll probably be happier. I've found ghcid to be useful when quickcheck + HPC + ChasingBottoms fails to narrow down the problem any further. Its gotten to the point where I often know exactly which LOC/module will be the next step (based on knowledge of the data dependencies). A fair share of bugs have fallen to the sword named vim as a result :-). It really is useful, but like all other haskellisms, one must learn to ride a bike all over again. At times I think of ghcid as the anti-gdb. If there's a series of let bindings, each mutating the predecessor, its enjoyable to see the debugger start at the bottom and crawl its way back up. Tom _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
