On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 2:49 AM, Dan Stromberg <drsali...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In fact, I tend to do lots of "otherwise pointless" variables, because I
> want to be able to quickly and easily insert print statements/functions
> without having to split up large commands, during debugging.
When will we next have a language with something like the REXX 'trace
i' command?
[C:\Desktop]rexxtry trace i; say 1+2*3 "equals" words(linein(word(source,3)))
95 *-* Say 1 + 2 * 3 'equals'
words(linein(word(source, 3)));
>L> "1"
>L> "2"
>L> "3"
>O> "6"
>O> "7"
>L> "equals"
>O> "7 equals"
>V> "OS/2 COMMAND C:\OS2\REXXTRY.CMD"
>L> "3"
>F> "C:\OS2\REXXTRY.CMD"
>F> "/* SAA-portable REXXTRY procedure
11/08/91 version 1.05"
>F> "7"
>O> "7 equals 7"
>>> "7 equals 7"
96 *-* Trace 'Off';
Intermediate expression/statement evaluation, full details. Takes some
knowledge to comprehend (>L> means literal, >V> variable, >F> function
return value, etc), but extremely handy. Unfortunately REXX is an
aging language, as evidenced by such features as DBCS support (but no
Unicode), and functions as first-class objects support (nonexistent).
But this is a feature that I'd love to see implemented somewhere else.
Which probably means I'm going to have to write it somewhere else...
ChrisA
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
