From: RichardOnRails <RichardDummyMailbox58407@...>
Date: 2011-02-04T22:30:23+09:00
Subject: Re: Strange "ruby -r debug t.rb" for PickAxe ver. 2's Fibonacci example

On Feb 3, 8:05 pm, "Rocky B." <rocky.bernst...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The Ruby program debug.rb which comes with Ruby 1.x is what you get when
> you run "ruby -rdebug t.rb" or "ruby -r debug t.rb". (You have a typo in
> the first example with the flag -t).
>
> ruby-debug, which installs a bin/rdebug to invoke the debugger from the
> outset, is something totally different. In contrast to debug.rb,
> ruby-debug is not part of the standard Ruby distribution. That is why
> you install it as a gem as you list above.
>
> The pickaxe books talk about debug.rb, not the ruby-debug gem. I think
> it safe to say that most folks who use any sort of debugger are nowadays
> using ruby-debug. (Even the IDE's like the ones from Eclipse, JetBrains,
> or Aptana use common code from  ruby-debug and none import any code from
> debug.rb)
>
> ruby-debug commands are largely a superset of the debug.rb command
> listed in the Pickaxe book. However more complete information on
> ruby-debug can be found athttp://bashdb.sourceforge.net/ruby-debug.html
>
> I realize all of this is confusing. Unfortunately it is a bit too late
> to change this in any significant way.
>
> In the next round of debuggers, the "trepanning" debuggers, (e.g.http://github.com/rocky/rb-trepanningandhttp://github.com/rbx-trepanning) I've tried to make the distinction
> more clear. The command-line invocation is not "rdebug" which can be
> confused with the command-line option -rdebug. And the prompt which had
> been (rdb) is now different.
>
> --
> Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Wow, Rocky,

That's a great explanation (that I've got to study) for the anomalies
I encountered.  There were other discrepancies I had noticed but
didn't include.  Your explanation and the links you supplied should
let me get my brain around this issue!

BTW, the "-t" typo was only in my introduction to my first example.
The code correctly used "-r".  That's why I like to post real code,
rather than my human sloppiness :-)

Thank you very, very much,
Richard