Jascha Wetzel wrote:
> yep, i was already thinking of mimicing gdb or MS dbg, but postponed
> that. i'll add an API in one of the next releases, such that different
> UIs can be added easily.

For what it's worth, the first thought that came to mind was: is this controllable by a GUI?

While I'm not writing any such software myself, having a stand-alone debugger that can be utilized for an IDE (built-in or otherwise) would be a very nice thing to have.

Keep up the excellent work. :)

-- 
- EricAnderton at yahoo

Jascha Wetzel wrote:
> Ddbg is a Win32 D Debugger
> 
> http://ddbg.mainia.de/releases.html
> 
> This release supports evaluation of structs and classes.
very cool!

Where can I find the source for this?

i haven't decided about the license, yet. it'll be on the release page then.

J Duncan wrote:
> Jascha Wetzel wrote:
>> Ddbg is a Win32 D Debugger
>>
>> http://ddbg.mainia.de/releases.html
>>
>> This release supports evaluation of structs and classes.
> very cool!
> 
> Where can I find the source for this?

Thank you. Keep up that great work! A debugger which could be used with a debugger-aware editor is one of very few things D really missing.

-- 
serg.

On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 13:36:38 +0200, Jascha Wetzel <"[firstname]"@mainia.de> wrote:
> Ddbg is a Win32 D Debugger
>
> http://ddbg.mainia.de/releases.html
>
> This release supports evaluation of structs and classes.

Nice! :)

Jascha Wetzel wrote:
> yep, i was already thinking of mimicing gdb or MS dbg, but postponed
> that. i'll add an API in one of the next releases, such that different
> UIs can be added easily.
> 

Excellent.  I was telling someone about D just yesterday (current C++ user, former Java user) and he was getting really into the idea of giving D a try -- garbage collection?  Great!  Compiled?  Great.  clean syntax?  Great!  No C++ integration?  Hmm... well you can call C pretty easily -- ok that'll do!  No debugger?  Oh.  Forget it then.

--bb

Jascha Wetzel wrote:
> Ddbg is a Win32 D Debugger
> 
> http://ddbg.mainia.de/releases.html
> 
> This release supports evaluation of structs and classes.

Nice! One issue I had with the arguments, though; if I pass one argument to ddbg after my exe name, then my exe receives exactly one argument. By convention shouldn't it receive its own name *then* the argument? I bet a lot of programs just start checking for arguments at args[1]; I know mine do.

Robin Allen wrote:
> Nice! One issue I had with the arguments, though; if I pass one argument to ddbg after my exe name, then my exe receives exactly one argument. By convention shouldn't it receive its own name *then* the argument? I bet a lot of programs just start checking for arguments at args[1]; I know mine do.

hm, i can't reproduce that. could you give an example program and the command you use to call ddbg with it?

Jascha Wetzel wrote:
> Robin Allen wrote:
>> Nice! One issue I had with the arguments, though; if I pass one argument
>> to ddbg after my exe name, then my exe receives exactly one argument. By
>> convention shouldn't it receive its own name *then* the argument? I bet
>> a lot of programs just start checking for arguments at args[1]; I know
>> mine do.
> 
> hm, i can't reproduce that. could you give an example program and the
> command you use to call ddbg with it?

--- main.d:

import std.stdio;

void main(char[][] args)
{
	writefln("%s args",args.length);
	foreach(arg; args)
		writefln("  %s",arg);
}

---

D:\Dev2\test>dmd -g main
d:\dmd\bin\..\..\dm\bin\link.exe main,,,user32+kernel32/co/noi;

D:\Dev2\test>d:\ddbg\ddbg main.exe spam1 spam2 spam3
ntdll.dll loaded
KERNEL32.dll loaded
USER32.dll loaded
GDI32.dll loaded
Unknown breakpoint hit at ntdll.dll (0x7c901230)
->r
ShimEng.dll loaded
IMM32.dll loaded
ADVAPI32.dll loaded
RPCRT4.dll loaded
LPK.dll loaded
USP10.dll loaded
msvcrt.dll loaded
3 args
  D:\Dev2\test\main.exe
  spam2
  spam3
Process terminated
->^C
D:\Dev2\test>

---

Shouldn't that be 4 args? What happened to spam1? :O

-Rob

ah, k - got it.
fixed it in the upcoming release 0.0.3
thanks for the report!

Robin Allen wrote:
> Jascha Wetzel wrote:
>> Robin Allen wrote:
>>> Nice! One issue I had with the arguments, though; if I pass one argument to ddbg after my exe name, then my exe receives exactly one argument. By convention shouldn't it receive its own name *then* the argument? I bet a lot of programs just start checking for arguments at args[1]; I know mine do.
>>
>> hm, i can't reproduce that. could you give an example program and the command you use to call ddbg with it?
> 
> --- main.d:
> 
> import std.stdio;
> 
> void main(char[][] args)
> {
>     writefln("%s args",args.length);
>     foreach(arg; args)
>         writefln("  %s",arg);
> }
> 
> ---
> 
> D:\Dev2\test>dmd -g main
> d:\dmd\bin\..\..\dm\bin\link.exe main,,,user32+kernel32/co/noi;
> 
> D:\Dev2\test>d:\ddbg\ddbg main.exe spam1 spam2 spam3
> ntdll.dll loaded
> KERNEL32.dll loaded
> USER32.dll loaded
> GDI32.dll loaded
> Unknown breakpoint hit at ntdll.dll (0x7c901230)
> ->r
> ShimEng.dll loaded
> IMM32.dll loaded
> ADVAPI32.dll loaded
> RPCRT4.dll loaded
> LPK.dll loaded
> USP10.dll loaded
> msvcrt.dll loaded
> 3 args
>   D:\Dev2\test\main.exe
>   spam2
>   spam3
> Process terminated
> ->^C
> D:\Dev2\test>
> 
> ---
> 
> Shouldn't that be 4 args? What happened to spam1? :O
> 
> -Rob