From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ddc669e8cf09b24
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-07-16 12:24:50 PST
Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: mcq95@earthlink.net (Marc A. Criley)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Debugger Rant
Date: 16 Jul 2003 12:24:50 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Message-ID: <254c16a.0307161124.633c9245@posting.google.com>
References: <mailman.0.1057725183.24167.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <uof03wunb.fsf@wanadoo.fr> <254c16a.0307110505.463b1cc0@posting.google.com>
 <beoc3k$7uh$1@slb5.atl.mindspring.net> <3F148F80.1000708@attbi.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.158.183.115
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1058383490 10589 127.0.0.1 (16 Jul 2003 19:24:50
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 16 Jul 2003 19:24:50 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:40352
Date: 2003-07-16T19:24:50+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Robert I. Eachus" <rieachus@attbi.com> wrote in message news:<3F148F80.1000708@attbi.com>...
> Brian Catlin wrote:
> 
> > I might be way off here, but it seems to me that you're using the debugger to
> > debug your understanding of the problem/program, rather than writing
> > specifications to figure out what you're really trying to do ahead of time.
> > Granted, that in today's environment, it is hard for management to accept
> > writing specs before coding, every study I've ever seen has shown that writing
> > specs ahead of time improves the development process and the quality of the code
> > produced.
> 
> Amen!  I just finished another post to the same effect.

Brian is way off here.

Where Bob uses Notepad or a sheet of paper, I use a whiteboard for the
same purpose.  I've got a good track record of bringing software in on
time that meets its requirements.

A debugger, like a whiteboard, is a powerful software development
tool, and I would fiercely oppose giving up either of them, or having
someone level at me the notion that they were simply a crutch.

After several years of reading the occasional response to an Ada
newbie that they'll virtually never need a debugger when programming
in Ada (as well as that if the code compiles, it'll probably work)--I
just got fed up with it.