>>>>> "AA" == Aaron Ardiri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> CW's debugger is MUCH better than gdb.
AA> you have a point there.. but not everyone uses a debugger.. :))
When you're using Windows, you'll find that's not true.
CW's debugger on Windows does not display the correct value at
correct moment. It seems that stack frame analyzing fails, and
display completely different address as "Variable" points.
This will not happen always. But in MOST case, it will.
#Especially when you're debugging >64k codes.
I found that CW on Mac does not have this kind of trouble, only,
that was after my project finished (;.;)
Also, if I may say, gdb is MUCH BETTER then CW, for me. You can
control breakpoint lot percisely then CW. I mean, on CW, you can
only set break point on source where CW allows. And sometime, they
will not give a point where we really need. gdb will not have this
kind of problem.
It is true, that gdb is extreamely poor at GUI. But, if your trouble
is this, then use Emacs, and use gdb on Emacs. You'll have
confortable UI there. If you environment allows you xemacs, you can
even have GUI, and that, better then CW debugger.
#After all, you need emacs anytime you use any software from FSF,
#or base on software from FSF.
----
Kenichi Okuyama@Tokyo Research Lab. IBM. Co. Japan.
