5 ms·

> And, nobody really steps through code anymore. I don't follow. What other technique is in, compared to code stepping? Sometimes I put a breakpoint in and st

by fb03 9y ago

> And, nobody really steps through code anymore. I don't follow. What other technique is in, compared to code stepping? Sometimes I put a breakpoint in and step thru code to help me figure if something is working properly or maybe live-inspect the return value of something that comes from the outside world. Maybe I'm missing some new fundamental technique to dev/debug? Thanks in advance. (genuine question)

steveklabnik 9y ago
"printf debugging" vs "debugging" is an eternal struggle. Many people do both, in both C++ and Rust. There are many, many essays written about the pros and cons of both approaches. Rust as a project is investing heavily in working towards excellent debugger support, because people do use it.
- nalllar 9y ago
  Debugging in CLion with gdb and the intellij-rust plugin is already quite pleasant. It even works remotely attached to bare metal embedded projects on stm32 microcontrollers! Unfortunately debugging isn't available with intellij-rust in the free IDEA community edition.
  - taeric 9y ago
    How well does it work with heavy use of macros? Specifically, what does it mean to "step into" a heavily macro based section? I'd be very interested in seeing examples.
taeric 9y ago
I have seen very few people actually hook up a debugger and step through code lately. This is particularly pronounced in many of the functional idioms that are making it into java and similar languages. Stepping through a loop is now much more involved, entering the stream is a step in, not just a step. I don't actually have a lot of experience with the rust world, but the main complaint with macros is typically that you can't step through them easily. With my getting downvoted, I'm assuming I'm wrong and that step debuggers are more common in rust than I was assuming. I think that makes me happy. If anyone has a good video demonstrating this level of tooling, I'd be interested.

by fb03 9y ago

steveklabnik 9y ago

"printf debugging" vs "debugging" is an eternal struggle. Many people do both, in both C++ and Rust. There are many, many essays written about the pros and cons of both approaches. Rust as a project is investing heavily in working towards excellent debugger support, because people do use it.

nalllar 9y ago
Debugging in CLion with gdb and the intellij-rust plugin is already quite pleasant. It even works remotely attached to bare metal embedded projects on stm32 microcontrollers! Unfortunately debugging isn't available with intellij-rust in the free IDEA community edition.
- taeric 9y ago
  How well does it work with heavy use of macros? Specifically, what does it mean to "step into" a heavily macro based section? I'd be very interested in seeing examples.

taeric 9y ago

I have seen very few people actually hook up a debugger and step through code lately. This is particularly pronounced in many of the functional idioms that are making it into java and similar languages. Stepping through a loop is now much more involved, entering the stream is a step in, not just a step. I don't actually have a lot of experience with the rust world, but the main complaint with macros is typically that you can't step through them easily. With my getting downvoted, I'm assuming I'm wrong and that step debuggers are more common in rust than I was assuming. I think that makes me happy. If anyone has a good video demonstrating this level of tooling, I'd be interested.