I don't like debugging with printf, although Medic does seem cool. I like to turn errors into test cases and then trace the execution of the program and turn one test case into more. This is a nice way to debug because it ensures the same error won't come up again.
Jay On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 2:51 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <sa...@cs.indiana.edu> wrote: > Having spent a bunch of time writing Python over the last year (while > building Pycket [1]), the debugger is the one thing I wish I had in > Racket. This isn't because it interacts with C (I've not used any C > extensions), but because it makes debugging much faster than when I > have to use printf (my usual strategy in Racket). I'm really excited > about Medic (https://github.com/lixiangqi/medic), which seems like a > very cool approach for adding more debugging to Racket. > > [1] https://github.com/samth/pycket > > Sam > > On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 2:41 PM, Matthias Felleisen > <matth...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote: >> >> I think we don't miss a conventional debugger in Racket (Emacs or Dr) >> because, unlike say Python, Racket is not a shallow layer over some >> unsafe amalgam of C and C++. Sure there is some of it left but our >> crashes don't leave core dumps because most of them are safe. >> >> I agree that on occasion it would be neat to say "stop here and >> let me explore/modify the environment and the store." Most of the >> time though you get away with printf because the language is safe >> I just don't consider it high priority until someone shows me a >> really good use case. >> >> -- Matthias >> >> >> >> >> >> On Feb 28, 2015, at 9:33 AM, Greg Hendershott wrote: >> >>>> Don't make me want to go back to programming Racket in Emacs :-) >>>> But thanks for mapping Emacs back into the fold. -- Matthias >>> >>> The more I do with racket-mode, the deeper my appreciation for >>> everything that DrRacket does. It's really quite amazing. >>> >>> Also the more I program in Emacs Lisp, the more I appreciate programming >>> in Racket. :) >>> >>> >>> p.s. The edebug feature in Emacs Lisp is one thing I do now miss in >>> Racket. IOW I'm tempted to tackle using DrRacket debugger annotations, >>> with an edebug UI in Emacs. Either per-function like edebug, or per >>> module(s) like DrR. >>> >>> Sure, I hardly ever want a debugger for Racket, in the way I used one >>> heavily and religiously for C/C++ (to step through new code the first >>> time instead of just hitting Run). After all we have the REPL, and >>> functions. And TBH printfs usually suffice. So I hardly every used the >>> debugger in DrRacket. >>> >>> And yet. Sometimes it would be handy to set breakpoints and step through >>> code. Now that I've done that enough with Elisp for racket-mode, I want >>> to be able to do it for Racket code, too. >>> >>> Aside from utility, there's just the raw challenge of making something >>> like that work. At least it would be a challenge, for me. >> >> ____________________ >> Racket Users list: >> http://lists.racket-lang.org/users > ____________________ > Racket Users list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users -- Jay McCarthy http://jeapostrophe.github.io "Wherefore, be not weary in well-doing, for ye are laying the foundation of a great work. And out of small things proceedeth that which is great." - D&C 64:33 ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
