[#407] New feature for Ruby? — Clemens.Hintze@...

Hi all,

27 messages 1999/07/01
[#413] Re: New feature for Ruby? — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 1999/07/01

Hi Clemens,

[#416] Re: New feature for Ruby? — Clemens Hintze <c.hintze@...> 1999/07/01

On Thu, 01 Jul 1999, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#418] Re: New feature for Ruby? — gotoken@... (GOTO Kentaro) 1999/07/01

Hi

[#426] Re: New feature for Ruby? — gotoken@... (GOTO Kentaro) 1999/07/02

Hi,

[#440] Now another totally different ;-) — Clemens Hintze <c.hintze@...>

Hi,

21 messages 1999/07/09
[#441] Re: Now another totally different ;-) — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 1999/07/09

Hi,

[#442] Re: Now another totally different ;-) — Clemens Hintze <c.hintze@...> 1999/07/09

On Fri, 09 Jul 1999, you wrote:

[#443] — Michael Hohn <hohn@...>

Hello,

26 messages 1999/07/09
[#444] interactive ruby, debugger — gotoken@... (GOTO Kentaro) 1999/07/09

Hi Michael,

[ruby-talk:00443]

From: Michael Hohn <hohn@...>
Date: 1999-07-09 17:45:07 UTC
List: ruby-talk #443
Hello,

I have some basic questions about ruby:

o   What is the "standard" way to use ruby interactively, like a shell?   

o   Why is the -debug flag special?  When writing/running a dynamically
    typed interactive program (like a gui), I *expect* errors, and
    getting a full, traversible stack trace with source file and line
    number information is *critical* (to me, at least).  Shouldn't
    the debugger be part of the ruby core?

    Put another way, is there a way to load a file, stay in the ruby
    toplevel, execute a few functions, and enter the debugger when
    errors occur?

    [ As an aside: Python does this properly, as does Gambit-C (a
      Scheme variant); perl, tcl, bash, and all other free Scheme
      implementations I found (STk, bigloo, elk, scheme48, scm, guile,
      stalin) have pitiful debugging support. ]

Thanks,
Michael

In This Thread

Prev Next