One additional item I thought I had in my yestermessage but apparently
forgot: don't forget the regex minilanguage. Debugging it should be
an integral part.
--
$jhi++; # http://www.iki.fi/jhi/
# There is this special biologist word we use for 'stable'.
# It is 'dead'. -- Jack Co
Great, thanks very much.
Dave
On Fri, 27 Apr 2001, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> > > see it.) The debugger must be able to see two scopes at the same time:
> > > its own and the debuggee's.
> >
> > Could you expand on this?
>
> http://www.xray.mpe.mpg.de/mailing-lists/perl5-porters/2001-02
> > see it.) The debugger must be able to see two scopes at the same time:
> > its own and the debuggee's.
>
> Could you expand on this?
http://www.xray.mpe.mpg.de/mailing-lists/perl5-porters/2001-02/msg01613.html
for example.
--
$jhi++; # http://www.iki.fi/jhi/
# There is th
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Johan Vromans wrote:
> Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Starting with 'P' is useful so we can keep our acronyms such as PMC and
>
> PERIL (hi Tom!).
>
> -- Johan
< ACCENT=ENGLISH>
Please, can't I have just a little PERIL?
< /AC
On Fri, 27 Apr 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> Thanks much for putting this together. I do appreciate it.
You are most welcome. I enjoyed it, and I'm looking forward to
updating it (though I'm hoping there will be a little more feedback,
particularly concerning the new suggestions).
>
On Thu, 26 Apr 2001, Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
>
> You list the particular commands as 'existing functionality'. I think
> this is a mistake, even if you didn't mean it that way, if it was just
> an artifact of your presentation format. I know that breaking
> debugging habits that have been i
Thanks much for putting this together. I do appreciate it.
At this stage, it might be better to go through and pull out the concepts
and capabilities we need, rather than get into the details of user
interface. Knowing, for example, that we need to provide help is more
important at this stage
