4 ms·

I think debuggers are actually a lot less useful than people think. Just by thinking, using a REPL, or putting in print statements you can solve probably 99% of

• tom_ 8y ago
  Or instead of putting in print statements, you could use a debugger. You don't even need to know which print statements you need, because when the program is stopped you can look at whatever you like. Thinking is still required, but I don't recommend relying on it, since it's typically what gets you into this whole mess in the first place. At the very least, don't rely on thinking to guess what the computer is doing, when you can use the debugger to find out for certain.
• AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
  I'd agree generally. I pretty much have only used debuggers when reverse engineering something or when I'm so hopelessly unable to see what the problem could be that I start suspecting the compiler might be at fault. Even when reverse engineering something it's best not to get bogged down in the instruction-by-instruction details and instead try to follow the general program flow and reason about how you would do something if you were in the programmers' shoes.
• magduf 8y ago
  This has been my experience as well: I only resort to the debugger when my other avenues have proven fruitless. They can also be useful for Heisenbugs. However, I did have one job working on an embedded device with no console at all, and a JTAG debugger was invaluable there. But I would have preferred to have a console and be able to do printf debugging, as for easier bugs it's just a lot quicker.
• ilikehurdles 8y ago
  I use a repl with a debugger attached in clojure. Best of both worlds :).