Re: [racket-dev] stepper UI question

2010-10-06 Thread Everett Morse
I was just trying to debug a program today that goes through a series of complex macros. I used Check Syntax so I can see what variables are bound where (some of which are syntax variables), and when I got stuck I wanted to see how the macro reduces. I clicked the macro stepper, and it spun

Re: [racket-dev] stepper UI question

2010-10-06 Thread Ryan Culpepper
On 10/06/2010 12:37 PM, Everett Morse wrote: I was just trying to debug a program today that goes through a series of complex macros. I used Check Syntax so I can see what variables are bound where (some of which are syntax variables), and when I got stuck I wanted to see how the macro reduces.

Re: [racket-dev] stepper UI question

2010-08-27 Thread Shriram Krishnamurthi
I can think of many different ways to make the stepper-definition correspondence manifest.  As John said, I once suggested that the code should be reduced in-place, in the definition window. Shriram doesn't like that idea (but he has never bothered to say why.) That's right, I didn't.

Re: [racket-dev] stepper UI question

2010-08-27 Thread Neil Van Dyke
John Clements wrote at 08/27/2010 05:38 PM: On Aug 26, 2010, at 11:09 PM, Ryan Culpepper wrote: Another, less invasive, way of making the stepper-definition connection might be on every step to scroll the definitions window and highlight the term from which the redex is derived. For

Re: [racket-dev] stepper UI question

2010-08-27 Thread Neil Van Dyke
John Clements wrote at 08/27/2010 06:29 PM: My earlier comment isn't suggesting that this isn't useful; it's asking whether doing this *simultaneously* with a separate display that's using substitution to evaluate an expression would cause cognitive overload. If none of the languages people

Re: [racket-dev] stepper UI question

2010-08-26 Thread Shriram Krishnamurthi
I like this. The Stepper becomes available as an aid to help you answer questions about how things came to be. It is indeed often the case that I lose the plot when stepping forward and hence go to the end and work backward; this could put you there right away. Yes, left-to-right scrolling

Re: [racket-dev] stepper UI question

2010-08-26 Thread Robby Findler
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 9:35 AM, Shriram Krishnamurthi s...@cs.brown.edu wrote: Is this a fair, operational restatement of your cautionary note: It will be much less complicated to add just a `how did I get here?' button to the REPL and have the rest of the stepper reside in its own window,

Re: [racket-dev] stepper UI question

2010-08-26 Thread Shriram Krishnamurthi
Understood, and agreed. Thanks! Anyone else have comments/suggestions? I really like Robby's UI suggestion and am treating it as the lead contender. On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 10:57 AM, Robby Findler ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu wrote: On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 9:35 AM, Shriram Krishnamurthi

Re: [racket-dev] stepper UI question

2010-08-26 Thread Matthias Felleisen
On Aug 26, 2010, at 11:59 AM, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote: Anyone else have comments/suggestions? Robby's idea of allowing students to choose how a RUN actually worked occurred to me too but I had a different behavior in mind. Instead of opening a separate window, I'd much rather see a

Re: [racket-dev] stepper UI question

2010-08-26 Thread Robby Findler
I can see how to do what Mattgias is suggesting at the snip level (so not as bad as I made out) but you won't get nested scroll bars so you might not like it. Robby On Thursday, August 26, 2010, Shriram Krishnamurthi s...@cs.brown.edu wrote: Understood.  But I think this is what Robby is saying

Re: [racket-dev] stepper UI question

2010-08-26 Thread John Clements
On Aug 26, 2010, at 10:59 AM, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote: Got it. Thanks for all the inputs and for the great suggestion! A couple of comments: 1) I could very well be mis-stating his position, but I think that Guillaume felt quite strongly that the reductions should occur in the

Re: [racket-dev] stepper UI question

2010-08-26 Thread Kathy Gray
On 26 Aug 2010, at 11:32:48, John Clements wrote: 3) It's not clear how you want to handle test cases; they don't currently generate anything in the interactions window, and yet this sounds like the thing that you're *most* likely to want to be able to step. For the sake of argument, let

Re: [racket-dev] stepper UI question

2010-08-26 Thread Shriram Krishnamurthi
That seems like the wrong point of integration. If I have (define v complex expr) (check-expect (g v) h) then simply stepping into (g v) may not at all be enough. If the stepper forced people to rewrite their programs just for steppability, that should be considered a bad design. Shriram

Re: [racket-dev] stepper UI question

2010-08-26 Thread Robby Findler
Well, that makes sense. I'm just saying that, in an ideal world, when using the DR, you're much more writing tests that typing things into the REPL. So it would be good if the stepper could support that better in some way. Robby On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Shriram Krishnamurthi

Re: [racket-dev] stepper UI question

2010-08-26 Thread John Clements
On Aug 26, 2010, at 5:23 PM, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote: I know Guillaume proposed to do it in the context of the editor. I'm unconvinced that that's the right way to go. At any rate, integrating into an existing bit of infrastructure (def'ns or inter's) is going to be much more complex