From: Jean-Christophe Filliatre <Jean-Christophe.Filliatre@lri.fr>
To: <donna+spam@cs.cmu.edu>
Cc: <caml-list@inria.fr>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] How useful do you find the OCaml debugger?
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 09:18:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <16416.43741.584621.112229@gargle.gargle.HOWL> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <!~!AAAAAJOwVq2HeURFjPF/cT+K05uE3isA@cs.cmu.edu>
donna+spam@cs.cmu.edu writes:
>
> My advisor and I were having a dicussion about the utility of debuggers for
> functional langugages. He was of the opinion that they are not very useful
> at all (for a functional language), and wondered if anyone even uses, for
> instance, the OCaml debugger. Based on google-ing I have done, it looks like
> it *is* used, but it's hard to get a good impression from just a web crawl.
> So:
>
> - Do you personally find the OCaml debugger useful?
>
> - Is there any sort of general opinion in the OCaml community about the
> debugger?
I agree: the ocaml debugger is not very useful because usually if your
ocaml code compiles it is correct :-)
I've used the ocaml debugger a few times, however, and it is quite
nice. Navigating in the source under Emacs and the ability to go
backward is really great. I never spent more than a few minutes inside
the debugger. The ocaml debugger also has a few drawbacks. Code for
pretty-printers have to be loaded as a separate code and this is a
pain: the ocaml debugger tries to load all the needed modules
recursively but often fails doing so (because there is a .mli without
a .ml, a module hidden into some library, etc.) It would be much more
easy to use pretty-printers from the code you're debugging, even if
the debugger has to load it twice, since you usually have some
pretty-printers for your abstract data types. It would be even more
useful if the debugger could print the values in abstract data types
(we don't need abstraction anymore, we are in the debugger).
My impression is that the ocaml debugger is not fully debugged,
probably because the ocaml team, as most of us, does not need a
debugger at all :-)
--
Jean-Christophe
-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-02-04 8:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-02-04 4:31 donna+spam
2004-02-04 8:18 ` Jean-Christophe Filliatre [this message]
2004-02-04 8:46 ` Thomas Fischbacher
2004-02-04 9:19 ` [Caml-list] " Jan Kybic
2004-02-04 10:15 ` [Caml-list] " Richard Jones
2004-02-04 10:30 ` Pierre Boulet
2004-02-04 15:04 ` Christophe Raffalli
2004-02-04 19:26 ` Kip Macy
2004-02-04 10:36 ` Henri Dubois-Ferriere
2004-02-04 15:38 ` Damien Doligez
2004-02-04 12:52 ` Nuutti Kotivuori
2004-02-04 15:35 ` Damien Doligez
2004-02-04 16:45 ` Ken Rose
2004-02-04 19:12 ` Issac Trotts
2004-02-22 21:21 ` _JusSx_
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=16416.43741.584621.112229@gargle.gargle.HOWL \
--to=jean-christophe.filliatre@lri.fr \
--cc=caml-list@inria.fr \
--cc=donna+spam@cs.cmu.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox