Hi armin,
*> This would print wrong-ish timestamps that couldn't really be used for
profiling (I mean, it could; you just have to know which timestamp belongs
to which message). I would suggest to *
*> rather store a flag after reading `\n` and attach the timestamp to the
following message.*
I
> Since debugging isn't time critical it might be necessary to add an additional
> step that scans tracing messages for newline characters, then massaging the
> output by inserting the time stamp. In other words, all occurrences of
>
> `\n`
>
> should be replaced with
>
> `\n[time stamp] `
>
