4 ms·
Yeah, but the general standard is for open languages to either have an open debugger (e.g.: V8 JS) or else otherwise have support for an open debugger interface
by chaorace 4y ago
Yeah, but the general standard is for open languages to either have an open debugger (e.g.: V8 JS) or else otherwise have support for an open debugger interface (e.g.: Rust via GDB).
It's not strictly unreasonable for MS to offer a proprietary debugger, but it is bass-ackwards for the core .NET team to not offer an open source debugger or open standards compliant debugger interface to go with their open source language.
- Krytos 4y agoRoslyn (the open-source compiler) can create open-PDB debugging files that are also an open-source format. You are 6 years too late to make that comment. And I think lldb works with .NET apps.
- ynik 4y agoThe debugger interface is open (it's part of the CLR itself), and so is the debug symbol file format. However the debugger interface is low-level, making writing a debugger engine from scratch fairly complex. The complaint is that Microsoft uses a restrictive license for their higher-level wrapper around the low-level API. But it should be possible to write independent .NET debuggers -- I believe Jetbrains has done so, Rider can debug C# code without the problematic Microsoft component.
- hardware2win 4y agoSamsung did it too
- GordonS 4y agoEven if Microsoft did release an OSS debugger with less features/performance than the proprietary debugger, you know the narrative would instantly change to complaining about keeping features/perf back for paid users.