RE: debugging

[merlyn]

in reply to debugging

I don't use the debugger to "debug" my code either: I come from the old school, where you just add print until it works. {grin} And since that's pretty painful, I usually just do incremental development, adding one little piece at a time, and running the code each time, so that I can tell where it broke when I broke something.

I do use the debugger frequently as an interactive Perl:

$ perl -deal

because the ability to type x arbitrary expression is pretty cool for testing out snippets.

-- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker

[toadi]

Actually I agree zith Merlyn. I don't have the ability to over see big problems. I just program a little, try it and add some more. I put print a lot... I just wanted to know if this was a good method.

My opinions may have changed,
but not the fact that I am right

[Adam]

The line:

print DEBUGOUT "\$var=$var\n" if DEBUGGING

Shows up all over my scripts. If I declare DEBUGGING as a constant the branches get compiled out, and I can choose to log the debug data for later or direct it to STDERR or STDOUT. I havn't done it yet, but I've been thinking about using btrott's Filehandle Filter to do even more with the DEBUGOUT filehandle. Oh, and data::dumper.pm is very useful too. Its rare that this technique doesn't provide me enough info and I have to resort to the debugger. But its nice to know that the debugger is there when I need it.