Re: Debugging Mathematica Code (Mathematica 7)
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg95665] Re: Debugging Mathematica Code (Mathematica 7)
- From: "m.g." <mg at michaelgamer.de>
- Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2009 06:19:34 -0500 (EST)
- References: <gl1okn$dpb$1@smc.vnet.net> <gl4a7r$gi7$1@smc.vnet.net>
On 22 Jan., 12:57, Jens-Peer Kuska <ku... at informatik.uni-leipzig.de> wrote: > Hi, > > I have never had such a problem but you should open the > debugger controls always before you send a > code piece to the kernel. > > I really suggest the Wolfram Workbench debugger ! > It works more like one would expect it > if one use a compiled language like C++. > > Have a look athttp://www.wolfram.com/broadcast/screencasts/workbench/debu= gging/ > > BTW We have stopped to make bugs in > in the programs we wrote, because it turns > out not to be useful at all ;-) > > Regards > Jens > > m.g. wrote: > > On 20 Jan., 12:57, Jens-Peer Kuska <ku... at informatik.uni-leipzig.de> > > wrote: > >> Hi, > > >> the Wolfram Workbench has an excellent debugger > >> and there are situations where you need it. > > >> BTW: What is so complicated ? > >> - go to the Evaluation Menu and open the Debugger > >> - now type into a notebook > > >> foo[0] = 1 > >> foo[n_Integer] /; n > 0 := n*foo[n - 1] > > >> use the mouse and mark in > >> foo[n_Integer] /; n > 0 := n*foo[n - 1] > >> the "foo[n - 1]" expression. > > >> Go to the debugger window and use > >> "Break at selection" Now the "foo[n - 1]" > >> has a red frame. > > >> Finally go to the notebook window and enter > > >> foo[4] > > >> as an input. And ... ta ta ta > >> The Stack window show the stack > >> and all is as it should. Now press "Continue" > >> ind the debugger menu to see the next > >> step in the recursion ... > > >> Regards > >> Jens > > >> magma wrote: > >>> No, there isn't a decent explanation. > >>> You can check prior posts by me and others on debugging, but this is > >>> the conclusion, basically. > >>> Anyway, the general feeling among knowledgeable users is that you do > >>> not really need a debugger. > >>> These users just sprinkle print statements here and there to see > >>> intermediate results. > >>> I additionally also use On[] and Off[] which help me see clearly the > >>> code flow. > >>> You don't really need much more. > >>> hth > >>> On Jan 19, 12:36 pm, "m.g." <m... at michaelgamer.de> wrote: > >>>> Hello Experts, > >>>> I made my fist steps with the Mathematica (so called) debugger a= nd= > > st= > >>> umbled > >>>> immediately. Is there anywhrere a documentation of this tool that is > >>>> worth it's name (a criterion which the Mathematica 7 documentatin on= d= > > ebu= > >>> g > >>>> surely fails). I've tried a lot, but I'm still at the stage "trial a= n > >>>> error". > >>>> Greetings > >>>> Mike > > > Hi Jens, > > > thanks for the fast reply. I did exactly this what you described, > > but: Sometimes it works, sometimes not. I used "step" and "step in", > > to see waht the code does, but it seems that frequent swithceing > > breakpoint on and of "irritates" the debugger and it's behavior gets a > > bit, say, probabilisitc, and therefore I was looking for documentation > > (for it could be my fault in missusing the tool without knowing there > > is a missuse). So I returned to the insertion of Print-Statements. > > > But I would like more to have a debugger which works well - it's more > > easy and comfortable like the print-statement workaround. > > > Greetings > > > Mike Thanks Jens for the information, I=B4m going to have a closer look at workbench (which up to now I do not own or use - but it seems to be a good tool). But first... I=B4m now going to a one week vacation (Toscana in winter could be good, too :-) ) Greetings Mike