REQ: Two small debugger requests

[BackupUser]

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by PB.

(1) Option to "Show Variables" all the time, instead of having to tick the
option when your app starts running.

(2) Add a 3 (or 5) line-high listview under the "Show Variables" window which
our apps can write text to during runtime with a new "Debug" command. For
example, if our app has a line like Debug 22/7 then this listview will
have a line added saying 3.142. Or, if our app said Debug a$ then
the listview would a line showing the value of a$ at that moment. Basically,
the equivalent of the VB Debug.Print command. Coding this into the editor
would be very quick and simple, and help immensely in debugging our apps.
(And unlike VB, the listview should clear itself every time we run our app).

PB - Registered PureBasic Coder

Edited by - PB on 07 January 2002 23:40:31

[BackupUser]

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by fred.

Ok, I will though about it. And of course, when the debugger is off, all the Debug commands are ignored -> no overhead. Good idea.

Fred - AlphaSND

[BackupUser]

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by PB.

Ok, I will though about it. And of course, when the debugger is off, all the Debug commands are ignored -> no overhead. Good idea.

Hi Fred,

What do you mean by "when the bebugger is off" ? I don't want the new "Debug"
command (if added) to override the existing debugger... it's an additional
command, that's all. Or did I misunderstand you?

My dream of the "Debug" command is to act like the "PrintN" command for the
console, except that instead of going to the console, it goes to a debugger
window, that's all.


PB - Registered PureBasic Coder

[BackupUser]

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by Danilo.

Yes PB.

You can use Debug-Commands everywhere
in your source.
If you turn debugging off for building
the final release .EXE, the debug
commands are ignored (not compiled).

So its not needed to remove all debug
commands before you sell you application,
its done automatically.

cya,
...Danilo

(registered PureBasic user)

[BackupUser]

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by fred.

If I add Debug as a standard command, when you will create your executable you will have to remove all of them, else it will be included in the final exec. But, if I do a special command, then you could let all Debug commands in your exec without any impact on speed or size when the debugger is OFF. Is it clearer ?

Fred - AlphaSND

[BackupUser]

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by Rings.

Basically,
the equivalent of the VB Debug.Print command

i like to see such a command, coz its sometimes better than
put a messagerequester to show the content of an result.
thanx

Siggi

[BackupUser]

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by PB.

i like to see such a command, coz its sometimes better than
put a messagerequester to show the content of an result.

That's exactly why I want it. Message requesters are okay, but not if
you're in a long loop -- it slows down your app because you have to keep
acknowledging the requester. At the moment I'm using OpenConsole() and
the PrintN command to simulate what we want, but this has two drawbacks:

(1) These commands are compiled as part of the exe, unless you comment
them out first (ew!).

(2) The console can't be scrolled backwards if you output a lot of data.

So a new "Debug" command, that gets ignored during exe creation, would
be fantastic.


PB - Registered PureBasic Coder

[BackupUser]

Restored from previous forum. Originally posted by Rings.

That's exactly why I want it. Message requesters are okay, but not if
you're in a long loop -- it slows down your app because you have to keep
acknowledging the requester.

exactly

Siggi