Daniel, we are not exactly writing a compiler in Pascal or C here, are we? All we do is do a couple of database queries and format some text. In my Java work I do a bit more, like propriatary protocols on TCP/IP, bit more working with files, some threads and that sort of stuff. But all in the comfortable world of a garbage collector and as long as you don't do galacticaly stupid things, like not closing a JDBC statement or sticking objects in a HashMap and don't take them out when you don't need them anymore, you'll be fine.
Unless you are using low level languages where you have to do your own memory management, as you described, I don't see a use for it. Trust me, if I were doing what you are working on, a debugger would be my best friends as well. But not using Tcl because there is no good debugger is such a dumb statement it makes me wonder if the person in question is actualy smart enough to write good code in the first place. Cheers, Bas. Daniël Mantione said: > On Fri, 21 May 2004, Bas Scheffers wrote: > >> Then they shouldn't be writing those bugs in the first place! ;-) > > Sorry but this is complete nonsense and often said by people who never > used a good debugger. > >> I have never used any debugging tools other than "puts" or >> System.out.println(), never needed it. But then again, I haven't done >> any >> C programming either... > > "puts" can be used as a debugger. However it completely falls short of the > power a good debugging environment can provide. You know, besides using > AOLserver I'm a developer of the Free Pascal compiler. > > A compiler is definately way too complicated to be debugged with > "writeln", as it's called in Pascal. So we use gdb. > > Now I can tell you, gdb is powerfull enough to be able to debug the > compiler, but we're currently in no way as effective in debugging the > compiler as we did a few years ago. > > Reason? A few years ago Free Pascal could still be compiled by Borland > Pascal and we were able to debug it with Turbo Debugger. I can assure you, > we lost *a* *lot* productivity by having to switch to gdb. And I can't > even think about how to debug the compiler with writeln. Imagine a > memory corruption bug that occurs halfway when the compiler is compiling > itself. You'll have no idea when the memory was corrupted, you only know > when the memory is accessed and contains wrong values. Go searching > without a debugger :) > >> Come to think of it, I never see anyone in our company use a debugger >> for >> Java and I can assure you we write very reliable software! > > This is because a debugger does not make you find more bugs. It only helps > you to understand them more quickly. > > Daniël > > > -- > AOLserver - http://www.aolserver.com/ > > To Remove yourself from this list, simply send an email to > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with the > body of "SIGNOFF AOLSERVER" in the email message. You can leave the > Subject: field of your email blank. > -- AOLserver - http://www.aolserver.com/ To Remove yourself from this list, simply send an email to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with the body of "SIGNOFF AOLSERVER" in the email message. You can leave the Subject: field of your email blank.
