On Wed, 2003-02-12 at 09:53, Jonathan Peterson wrote: > >> Given the feedback on suggestions about perl debugger tutorials, I > >>don't think many perl *users* use the debugger, so to me that explains why > >>no-one in the world noticed it sooner. To most perl users, the debugger is > >>not fundamental. > > > > I'd use it if I knew how <shrug>. > > The perl debugger is about as much fun as ed. Also, many people use perl > wrapped up inside some web environment which makes it not conducive to > debugging with the debugger. > > But I think that's a shame, because a debugger really ought to be more > fun than print statements. For all I know Activestate's Visual Debugger > is great. In fact I think I'll try it out.
This is all a great mystery to me. Perhaps doing this for nigh on 30 years has made me an old codger, but: why do you need some snazzy windowing pretty debugger? The only thing you are every likely to do with it is: find your place (l), stick a break point there (b), run your program (r). When you get there you may: see how you got there (T), print a variable (p or x), single step instruction either entering subs (s) or not (n) then maybe restart the program (c), maybe after removing all your breakpoints (D). The only other command I use is help (h) very occasionally. It isn't hard. If a now terminally braindead programmer of 49 like me can remember these commands I can't see why other people can't. Oh and you start it with perl -d x.pl Dirk -- Please Note: Some Quantum Physics Theories Suggest That When the Consumer Is Not Directly Observing This Product, It May Cease to Exist or Will Exist Only in a Vague and Undetermined State.
