Cristian Vlasceanu wrote:
> John Reimer wrote:
>> On Wed, 26 Dec 2007 10:33:40 +0100, Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
>>
>>> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>>> If you're not on Windows then I presume gdb works?  I guess that
>>>> doesn't have any D-specific knowledge.  Support for D in zerobugs is
>>>> still vaporware?
> The debugger cannot help much when the debug information produced by the compiler is not 100% accurate.
> 
>>> I did a quick test, and zerobugs has at least some D support. Types
>>> seems to be correctly demangled in the variables view, whereas functions
>>> and method names in the stack trace are not. I wasn't immediately able
>>> to pinpoint the location of my segfault though (a real one that I knew
>>> of), although the stacktrace showed up. Definately better looking than
>>> gdb, all in all :)
>>  
> 
> An outline of how ZeroBUGS handles stack unwinding: if there is DWARF information present, then look for frame-unwinding information. Otherwise, assume the System V ABI for the i386 and PowerPC and Itanium ABI for X86_64.
> 
> Again, do not blame the debugger for what the compiler does not produce.
> 
> Unless you have a 100% accurate stack trace from another debugger for the same executable and platform, in which case I do beg you to send me a bug report.
> 
> 
>> Yes, just recently I've been experimenting with zerobugs.  It was much easier to use with D than the other linux debuggers since D symbols are demangled. 
> 
> I use a very slightly modified version of Thomas Kuehne's demangler (basically I added a function to show his copyright when I display the About window, and tweaked the config.h). It is built as a shared object so  you are free to tinker with it, the code is here: http://www.zerobugs.org/demangle_d.tgz
> 
> 
> 
>> The stacktrace does kind of show the general position of the segfault also.  I like the way it opens any associated shared libraries and shows the disassembly in a new tab as you step into the function calls.
>>
>> One frustration is that char[] still are represented as a length and pointer, thus you don't get to see the text object associated with it. But even then, sometimes you can see it by expanding the related tree for the ptr object.
>>
> Do you have an associative array of chars, or just char[]? Associative arrays do not work yet (it is coming though, I promise), but char[] should work I just tried it today with dmd 2.0, see snapshot here: http://zero-bugs.com/zero-char.png
> 
> Best Regards and a Happy new Year();
>  Cristian

The arrays are not associative.  They are char[][] from the main argument list.  I'm not sure why they weren't working.  Maybe I have an older version?  I'll have a look.

You've done great work with zerobugs, Christian.  Thanks for the contribution, despite the odds. :o)

-JJR

Jason House wrote:
> Bill Baxter Wrote:
>> If you're not on Windows then I presume gdb works?  I guess that doesn't have any D-specific knowledge.  Support for D in zerobugs is still vaporware?
> 
> It looks like it's going that way.  Looking at the zerobugs FAQ, I see:
> 
>  Does Zero work with other languages than C/C++?
>     A: I have not tested it with other languages. However, the debug information in STABS and DWARF is language-independent.
> The only language-dependent part in Zero is the interpreter which can only evaluate C++ expressions.
> 
> I have started some preliminary work to support Walter Bright's D Programming Language, and a D demangler has been contributed by the D community. However, this work is in an experimental stage. 


I guess the fact that the author answered these very posts says otherwise?

Jascha Wetzel wrote:
> Bill Baxter wrote:
>> ddbg does a pretty decent job on Windows.  Still, it gives me no stack trace upon "access violation" a significant fraction of the time.
> 
> a good chunk of which was caused by a bug introduced in 0.11 that is fixed now in 0.11.2.

You gotta announce these things!

Thanks to 0.11.2 I was at last able to track down a tricky null dereference that was only happening sporadically.  With 0.11.1 I was getting zilch from the debugger.

Thanks!

--bb

Reply to Bill,

> Jascha Wetzel wrote:
> 
>> Bill Baxter wrote:
>> 
>>> ddbg does a pretty decent job on Windows.  Still, it gives me no
>>> stack trace upon "access violation" a significant fraction of the
>>> time.
>>> 
>> a good chunk of which was caused by a bug introduced in 0.11 that is
>> fixed now in 0.11.2.
>> 
> You gotta announce these things!
> 
> Thanks to 0.11.2 I was at last able to track down a tricky null
> dereference that was only happening sporadically.  With 0.11.1 I was
> getting zilch from the debugger.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> --bb
> 

Put the ___ thing in SVN (the .exe if nothing else). I have about a dozen repos I download on a regular basis, I'd almost bet I wouldn't be the only one who would benefit.