Process local variable and debugging
Stephen Pair
spair at advantive.com
Mon Feb 11 19:37:51 UTC 2002
Wouldn't it be better to clone the process local variables into the
process used for debugging rather than hack #activeProcess (which I
think would create more problems than it solves)?
- Stephen
> -----Original Message-----
> From: squeak-dev-admin at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> [mailto:squeak-dev-admin at lists.squeakfoundation.org] On
> Behalf Of Andreas Raab
> Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 2:26 PM
> To: squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> Subject: RE: Process local variable and debugging
>
>
> Tim,
>
> None of the stuff I did (which has been a while ago) worked
> correctly in the debugger. Notice that just intercepting
> #activeProcess won't help - it may be sent during a
> #quickStep (e.g., a non-simulated send during simulated
> execution) which is _not_ run in the simulated process.
>
> Cheers,
> - Andreas
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: squeak-dev-admin at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> > [mailto:squeak-dev-admin at lists.squeakfoundation.org] On
> > Behalf Of Tim Rowledge
> > Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 8:01 PM
> > To: squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> > Subject: RE: Process local variable and debugging
> >
> >
> > I like the general ideas here but have a couple of queries.
> >
> > First, at the moment (as of update #4652) pool variables
> appear to be
> > accessed using the pushLiteralVariable bytecodes, which
> does not send
> > #value to the association. Changing that would involve some
> compiler
> > hacking that I hope somebody else has already done. I hate to
> > needlessly repeat redundantly unneccessary coding.
> >
> > Second, since the current system puts actual associations in
> > the method
> > literal frame, simply swapping an array of associations doesn't seem
> > likely to be enough on its own.
> >
> > Third, I'm not yet convinced that this approach helps with
> my original
> > problem in the debugger. If the process-globals are swapped when
> > process are swapped (which seems pretty much required) then the
> > debugger process
> > will usurp the expected values of the original code. If the debugger
> > _doesn't_ do the normal thing, then it might have problems
> if it were
> > expecting to use its own process-globals anywhere.
> >
> > Fourth, I seem to remember reading that there are some
> problems with
> > PoolDictionaries and modules. What to do?
> >
> > So, Andreas your message implies you've been making use of a
> > facility of
> > this sort and I'd be delighted to get hold of the relevant
> > code asap :-)
> >
> > tim
> > --
> > Tim Rowledge, tim at sumeru.stanford.edu,
> http://sumeru.stanford.edu/tim
> > Don't be sexist; broads hate that!
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|