4 ms·

Yeah, I don't think so. It's x86_64 only, and C only too. Some points from your list make sense now, but most of it is simply not part of Spray's scope, and nev

Yeah, I don't think so. It's x86_64 only, and C only too. Some points from your list make sense now, but most of it is simply not part of Spray's scope, and never has been ...

thibaut_barrere 3y ago
Not commenting on the debugger specifically, but: keep being curious & experimenting, it will go a long way :-) (I was in your shoes)
lopkeny12ko 3y ago
The point the parent commenter is trying to make is that building a general purpose C debugger is not some kind of trivial exercise that can be shipped in 6 months, and claiming to have done so is disingenuous and pompous.
- thibaut_barrere 3y ago
  > claiming to have done so is disingenuous and pompous. I don't read anything that might express that? Especially with: >> Its feature set is limited at this point, but it's already enough to tackle some basic problems.
- roadbuster 3y ago
  The parent commenter doesn't need to piss on a 17 year old for sharing their work and progress. You could also take a moment to step back and reflect on this.
  - dang 3y ago
    Please don't respond to a bad comment by breaking the site guidelines yourself. That only makes things worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- dang 3y ago
  Please don't cross into name-calling and certainly not personal attack. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- owenpalmer 3y ago
  > building a general purpose C debugger is not some kind of trivial exercise Yes > claiming to have done so is disingenuous and pompous Nobody has claimed to do so in this situation. You are inventing conflict. Also I don't think bregma intended to be this targeting or accusatory, why are you speaking for them?