On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 05:19:43AM -0300, Crystal Kolipe wrote:
> On Sun, May 12, 2024 at 10:26:55PM +0200, Tomasz Rola wrote:
> > I am sure gdb has some merits but for whatever C programs I wrote so
> > far, a much more useful debugging technique was putting printf in
> > right places and isolate the problem, and after that doing some mental
> > work to actually understand why this seemingly correct line does
> > something so wrong.
> 
> Exactly.  What you describe is likely the best method to fully understand the
> code, what it's supposed to do and what it actually does, and by extension
[...]

Yes, I guess.

> > Besides, all debuggers introduce their own perturbation and thus
> > certain classes of error will be very hard to catch with them, if
> > ever.
> 
> But you do realise that adding printf() calls to the code can also change,
> for example, the memory layout that the compiler uses, so certain memory
> allocation bugs might become more or less easily triggerable?

No, this did not occurred to me, at least not in such explicit
way. Albeit somewhere deep I realise that program execution can
change, if for example two "not related" lines of code switch places
etc. (because of optimisation, for example).

Before you pointed it out above I considered printf to be almost
non-intrusive way of debugging. Thanks!

-- 
Regards,
Tomasz Rola

--
** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature.      **
** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home    **
** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened...      **
**                                                                 **
** Tomasz Rola          mailto:tomasz_r...@bigfoot.com             **

Reply via email to