Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On 9/7/2017 10:45 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: On Sep 7, 2017, at 16:19, Terry Reedy wrote: I think breakpoint() should have a db= parameter so one can select a debugger in one removable line. The sys interface is more useful for IDEs to change the default, possible with other

[Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

Barry Warsaw writes: > and you would drop into the debugger after foo() but before bar(). > More rationale and details are provided in the PEP: > > https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0553/ > > Unlike David, but like Larry, I have a prototype implementation: > >

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On Sep 7, 2017, at 18:03, Fernando Perez wrote: > Ah, perfect! I've subscribed to the PR on github and can pitch in there > further if my input is of any use. Awesome, thanks! -Barry signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On Sep 7, 2017, at 16:19, Terry Reedy wrote: > I think breakpoint() should have a db= parameter so one can select a debugger > in one removable line. The sys interface is more useful for IDEs to change > the default, possible with other args (like breakpoints and colors)

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On 2017-09-07 23:00:43 +, Barry Warsaw said: On Sep 7, 2017, at 14:25, Barry Warsaw wrote: I’ll see what it takes to add `header` to pdb.set_trace(), but I’ll do that as a separate PR (i.e. not as part of this PEP). Turns out to be pretty easy.

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On 9/7/2017 4:19 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: A somewhat separate point: the name breakpoint() is slightly misleading, which has consequences if it is (improperly) called more than once. While breakpoint() acts as a breakpoint, what it does (at least in the default pdb case) is *initialize* and

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On 9/7/2017 12:52 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: On Sep 7, 2017, at 07:46, Guido van Rossum wrote: Without following all this (or the PEP, yet) super exactly, does this mean you are satisfied with what the PEP currently proposes or would you like changes? It's a little unclear

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On Sep 7, 2017, at 14:25, Barry Warsaw wrote: > > I’ll see what it takes to add `header` to pdb.set_trace(), but I’ll do that > as a separate PR (i.e. not as part of this PEP). Turns out to be pretty easy. https://bugs.python.org/issue31389

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On Sep 7, 2017, at 12:09, Fernando Perez wrote: >> The PEP has an open issue regarding breakpoint() taking *args and **kws, >> which would just be passed through the call stack. It sounds like you’d be >> in favor of that enhancement. > > If you go witht the `(*a, **k)`

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On Sep 7, 2017, at 13:52, Terry Reedy wrote: > pdb.set_trace is a public and stable interface. IDLE's is private and likely > to be initially unstable. I can imagine that the function that I would want > to bind to sys.__breakpoint__ would be a bound method To be

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On Sep 7, 2017, at 14:04, Fred Drake wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:52 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: >> Environmental variables tend to be a pain on Windows and nigh unusable by >> beginners. Leaving that aside, I see these problems with trying to use one >>

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 4:52 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: > Environmental variables tend to be a pain on Windows and nigh unusable by > beginners. Leaving that aside, I see these problems with trying to use one > for IDLE's *current* debugger. > > pdb is universal, in the sense of

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On 9/7/2017 12:50 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: On Sep 6, 2017, at 23:10, Terry Reedy wrote: Environmental variables are set to strings, not objects. It is not clear how you intend to handle the conversion. The environment variable names a module import path. Without

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On 2017-09-07 00:20:17 +, Barry Warsaw said: Thanks Fernando, this is exactly the kind of feedback from other debuggers that I’m looking for. It certainly sounds like a handy feature; I’ve found myself wanting something like that from pdb from time to time. Glad it's useful, thanks for

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On Sep 7, 2017, at 10:00, Christian Heimes wrote: > Setuptools' entry points [1] use colon between import and function, e.g. > "pdb:set_trace" would import pdb and then execute set_trace. The > approach can be augmented to allow calling a class method, too. > > So > >

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On 2017-09-07 09:50, Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Sep 6, 2017, at 23:10, Terry Reedy wrote: >> >> Environmental variables are set to strings, not objects. It is not clear >> how you intend to handle the conversion. > > The environment variable names a module import path. Without

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On Sep 7, 2017, at 07:46, Guido van Rossum wrote: > Without following all this (or the PEP, yet) super exactly, does this mean > you are satisfied with what the PEP currently proposes or would you like > changes? It's a little unclear from what you wrote. I’m also unsure

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On Sep 6, 2017, at 23:10, Terry Reedy wrote: > > Environmental variables are set to strings, not objects. It is not clear how > you intend to handle the conversion. The environment variable names a module import path. Without quibbling about the details of the syntax

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 11:59 PM, Terry Reedy wrote: > On 9/6/2017 6:45 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: > >> On Sep 6, 2017, at 14:59, Terry Reedy wrote: >> >>> >>> Currently, the debugger is started in response to a menu seletion in the >>> IDLE process while the

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On 9/6/2017 6:45 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: On Sep 6, 2017, at 14:59, Terry Reedy wrote: Currently, the debugger is started in response to a menu seletion in the IDLE process while the python process is idle. One reason for the 'idle' requirement' is because when code is

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On 9/6/2017 6:24 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: On Sep 6, 2017, at 10:14, Fabio Zadrozny wrote: I think it's a nice idea. Great! Related to the name, on the windows c++ there's "DebugBreak": https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms679297(v=vs.85).aspx,

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On Sep 6, 2017, at 16:55, Fernando Perez wrote: > > If I may suggest a small API tweak, I think it would be useful if > breakpoint() accepted an optional header argument. In IPython, the equivalent > for non-postmortem debugging is IPython.embed, which can be given a

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

If I may suggest a small API tweak, I think it would be useful if breakpoint() accepted an optional header argument. In IPython, the equivalent for non-postmortem debugging is IPython.embed, which can be given a header. This is useful to provide the user with some information about perhaps

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On Sep 6, 2017, at 14:59, Terry Reedy wrote: > > Currently, the debugger is started in response to a menu seletion in the IDLE > process while the python process is idle. One reason for the 'idle' > requirement' is because when code is exec-uting, the loop that reads >

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On Sep 6, 2017, at 10:14, Fabio Zadrozny wrote: > > I think it's a nice idea. Great! > Related to the name, on the windows c++ there's "DebugBreak": > https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms679297(v=vs.85).aspx, > which I think is a better name (so,

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On 9/6/2017 10:42 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote: I don’t think that’s a good idea. pdb is a thing, and that thing is the standard library debugger. I don’t think ‘pdb’ should be the term we use to describe a generic Python debugger interface. That to me is one of the advantages of PEP 553; it

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On Sep 6, 2017, at 10:19, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > 99% of the time I use a debugger I use pdb.set_trace(). The pm() stuff is > typically useful for debugging small, simple programs only -- complex > programs likely hide the exception somewhere (after logging it) so there's

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

99% of the time I use a debugger I use pdb.set_trace(). The pm() stuff is typically useful for debugging small, simple programs only -- complex programs likely hide the exception somewhere (after logging it) so there's nothing for pdb.pm() to look at. I think Barry is wisely focusing on just the

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

Hi Barry, I think it's a nice idea. Related to the name, on the windows c++ there's "DebugBreak": https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms679297(v=vs.85).aspx, which I think is a better name (so, it'd be debug_break for Python -- I think it's better than plain breakpoint(),

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 7:39 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: >> This would also avoid confusion with IPython's very >> useful debug magic: >> >>

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On Sep 6, 2017, at 07:46, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > IIRC they indeed insinuate debug() into the builtins. My suggestion is also > breakpoint(). breakpoint() it is then! I’ll rename the sys hooks too, but keep the naming scheme of the existing sys hooks. Cheers, -Barry

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 10:46 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote: > IIRC they indeed insinuate debug() into the builtins. My suggestion is > also breakpoint(). > I'm also a bigger fan of the `breakpoint` name. `debug` as a name is already pretty widely used, plus breakpoint is more

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

IIRC they indeed insinuate debug() into the builtins. My suggestion is also breakpoint(). On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 7:39 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote: > On Sep 5, 2017, at 20:15, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > > > Yeah, I like the idea, but I don't like the debug() name

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On Sep 5, 2017, at 19:31, Giampaolo Rodola' wrote: > > True. Personally I have a shortcut in my IDE (Sublime) so I when I type "pdb" > -> TAB it auto completes it. > > Somehow I think debug() would make this a bit harder as it's more likely a > "debug()" line will pass

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On Sep 5, 2017, at 20:15, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > Yeah, I like the idea, but I don't like the debug() name -- IIRC there's a > helper named debug() in some codebase I know of that prints its arguments > under certain circumstances. > > On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 7:58 PM,

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

Yeah, I like the idea, but I don't like the debug() name -- IIRC there's a helper named debug() in some codebase I know of that prints its arguments under certain circumstances. On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 6:14 PM, Barry Warsaw

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On Tue, Sep 5, 2017, at 19:57, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > Sorry, are we to interpret this as you asking that the PEP be rejected? > I can't tell whether you are being poetic and actually think the PEP is > a good idea, or whether you have written it to have it rejected and > prevent anyone else

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On Tue, Sep 05, 2017 at 06:14:12PM -0700, Barry Warsaw wrote: > I’ve written a PEP proposing the addition of a new built-in function > called debug(). Adding this to your code would invoke a debugger > through the hook function sys.debughook(). [...] > P.S. This came to me in a nightmare on

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 6:14 PM, Barry Warsaw wrote: > I’ve written a PEP proposing the addition of a new built-in function called > debug(). Adding this to your code would invoke a debugger through the hook > function sys.debughook(). The 'import pdb; pdb.set_trace()' dance

Re: [Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

> It's a lot to type (27 characters). True. Personally I have a shortcut in my IDE (Sublime) so I when I type "pdb" -> TAB it auto completes it. > Python linters (e.g. flake8 [1]) complain about this line because it contains two statements. Breaking the idiom up into two lines further

[Python-Dev] PEP 553: Built-in debug()

I’ve written a PEP proposing the addition of a new built-in function called debug(). Adding this to your code would invoke a debugger through the hook function sys.debughook(). Like the existing sys.displayhook() and sys.excepthook(), you can change sys.debughook() to point to the debugger of