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=0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,MSGID_RANDY
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,5265ce03ee8f5252
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-01-08 08:11:38 PST
Path: 
 supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!news.iac.net!news-out.cwix.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!nntp2.deja.com!nnrp1.deja.com!not-for-mail
From: Ted Dennison <dennison@telepath.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Ok sorry, it is just a book gives no feedback.
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2001 15:58:58 GMT
Organization: Deja.com
Message-ID: <93co3t$nd8$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
References: <t4ug0qb63j7e4e@corp.supernews.co.uk>
 <931r2l$4ai5t$2@ID-25716.news.dfncis.de> <931t08$5u5$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <932632$e0e$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <932an8$ijs$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <93421h$2ju$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <934j5c$eu9$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
 <ZZq56.1574$xo3.422321@homer.alpha.net> <dxC7xviP+UiB@eisner.decus.org>
 <937jk6$s6l$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <aYmc6X7X+C3D@eisner.decus.org>
 <ubstiozon.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.48.27.130
X-Article-Creation-Date: Mon Jan 08 15:58:58 2001 GMT
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; WinNT4.0; en-US;
 m18) Gecko/20001207
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x59.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 204.48.27.130
X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDtedennison
Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:3780
Date: 2001-01-08T15:58:58+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <ubstiozon.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov>,
  Stephen Leake <stephen.a.leake.1@gsfc.nasa.gov> wrote:
> Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen) writes:
>
> > I supposed it might be annoying to some people, but I detest
> > that style of debugging.  I much prefer to place a breakpoint
> > (even a conditional breakpoint) that will examine the data in
> > question rather than change the source.
>
> Until I started writing programs for Win95, I agreed with Ted. But
> even the GNAT debugger can't properly handle breakpoints in a window
> procedure under Win95 (WinNT is only a little better). So now I'm used
> to Text_IO.Put_Line for debugging.

I think you meant "Larry". Generally, I'd agree with him. But I
currently find myself in a situation where I don't have access to
source-level debugging on our target machines. Plus, I'm doing a lot of
real-time work, which means I get a lot of "timing bugs". Timing bugs
can't really be debugged using intrusive methods like a debugger. So I'm
actually getting pretty good at debugging via other such means. But one
can always become attached to one's faithful tools. I'll sure miss
Windview on my next project!

--
T.E.D.

http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html


Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/