Tobias~ I agree with you completely about debugging the source language. We have a source level debugger for our language that is far more useful for that. But most of my time is spent extending and debugging the compiler itself.
Matt On Nov 22, 2009 1:49 PM, "Tobias Ivarsson" <[email protected]> wrote: Interesting that you mentions this. For debugging the compiler, maybe. I find however that when working in a language, any language, I want my debugger to point to source locations in the source I wrote, and not in some generated intermediate language that I don't care about for getting the job done. ANTLR is a great example of this. Debugging an ANTLR grammar is hard work due to the extra step I need to go through to map the locations my debugger tells me to the actual locations in the grammar when I single step through the parser. /Tobias On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Matt Fowles <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Robert~ > > Ease of debugging mostly. Our production environment > always goes straight to byteco... > > -- > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "JVM Languages" group... > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM Languages" grou... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM Languages" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages?hl=.
