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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,37a004cb543745e2 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Ehud Lamm Subject: Re: ada debugger Date: 1999/05/03 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 473423843 References: <372B1317.6477DFA2@santandersupernet.com> <7giuca$rf3$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Organization: The hebrew University of Jerusalem Mime-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-05-03T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: On Mon, 3 May 1999, Robert Dewar wrote: > In article > il>, > Ehud Lamm wrote: > > My students don't like gdb, being mostly with PC background etc. > > > > Does there exist some debugger that is friendlier? > > > > Ehud Lamm mslamm@pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il > > > How could anyone possibly know the answer to this question if you > don't give some idea of what you find unfriendly about GDBTK! > People have all sorts of ideas about what they want in debuggers. > Discussion of these ideas is fruitful, but a general message like > the one above is not helpful! > Since this wan't meant as a acritique, simply a call-for-suggestions, I think that saying that people come with a "PC backround" is quite enough. I find that discussing development tools, at least on Usenet usually results in more heat than light. This is why I am just intersted in pointers to tools anyone thinks may fit the bill of being "more pc like" (i.e., as clsoe to possible to M$ or Borland (rip) debuggers. Than instead of verbally discussing them, I can simply go and check them out. Ehud Lamm mslamm@pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il