Great work Jed and Doug! I already reviewed Jed's changes and I'm favor
to add them to 2.2 because they are not so disruptive.
I think this was the last missing piece to make our debugging support
really shine!
Cheers,
Carlos
El 06/04/13 11:01, Jed Ludlow escribió:
On Friday, April 5, 2013 10:32:58 PM UTC-6, Jed Ludlow wrote:
On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Sylvain Corlay wrote:
Jed, do you think this patch is an acceptable solution to
issues 849
<https://code.google.com/p/spyderlib/issues/detail?id=849&q=MS%3Dv2.3&colspec=ID%20MS%20Stars%20Priority%20Modified%20Cat%20Type%20Status%20Owner%20Summary>
and
609
<https://code.google.com/p/spyderlib/issues/detail?id=609&q=MS%3Dv2.3&colspec=ID%20MS%20Stars%20Priority%20Modified%20Cat%20Type%20Status%20Owner%20Summary>
?
Cheers,
S.
Sorry for the long delay in responding on this thread. I've now
got all the files patched, and I'm looking at it in more detail
now. I hope to have some more results tomorrow.
Jed
I've completed a more thorough review. This is an excellent approach.
I ultimately want to make breakpoint setting bi-directional (a change
in Spyder gets reflected in pdb sessions *and* command line breakpoint
changes in pdb sessions get reflected in Spyder), but the first
direction is far more critical than the second.
I made a few modifications to make the solution a bit more general. It
turns out that the previous approach didn't quite cover the "Clear all
breakpoints" case, and it also wasn't working for the right-click
context menu commands in the breakpoint plugin. To make that work, I
had to use a slightly bigger hammer, basically eliminating all
breakpoints and resetting them again every time a breakpoint change
was made. I agree that it would be better in the long run to be less
aggressive, but to get that working right for all possible use cases
will take bigger changes.
Rather than push the changes directly to the default repo I have
pushed them to my clone at bookmark jedludlow-issue-609 :
https://code.google.com/r/jedludlow-spyderlib-default/source/detail?r=60d63ffc8b5d68111f73f023305366b5dcc69361
I have also asked for review to decide if this should go into 2.2 or
wait for 2.3. Feel free to chime in either by direct code review
comments inline with the code or by commenting on the code review
request here:
https://code.google.com/p/spyderlib/issues/detail?id=1345
Jed
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "spyder" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
an email to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/spyderlib?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"spyder" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/spyderlib?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
