From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andy Wingo Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: racing srfi-18 threads Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 23:51:59 +0200 Message-ID: References: <2e6d10880911060129s538fab2cv84805475450f33d0@mail.gmail.com> <2e6d10880911060652g56092de3g649c540e54102c05@mail.gmail.com> <87bpjcy4bc.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> <87skceglog.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> <87my2iuksq.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> <87ws1582wk.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> <878wdjpt4z.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1279662567 2452 80.91.229.12 (20 Jul 2010 21:49:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 21:49:27 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Guile Development To: Neil Jerram Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 20 23:49:26 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ObKgn-0007IK-UC for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 23:49:26 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48076 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ObKgn-0004R8-BU for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 17:49:25 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=47828 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ObKgh-0004P9-6O for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 17:49:20 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ObKgf-0001uM-Sv for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 17:49:19 -0400 Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:45795 helo=sasl.smtp.pobox.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ObKgf-0001uG-RC for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 17:49:17 -0400 Original-Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8B57C6E94; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 17:49:16 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=VWDqxAK1fIpo+BIh0hRVxU1ABkk=; b=CKGlNQ EoLClvjQNpxIfdPQbubZTREuIJ5JLI83UtxtQy7/PO/WCtoa2YwJ6MvHUMK7J3yz +KDbFYD8V/pSkFFOZuzp6QKIdxIrmfRmEy/7f/K5ERHUsmlNRTwSYOQwYeUgwtz9 CTD9rru+jSifPfsrG3vU/0nsl2DZ1hWwaY2dg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=o4Yao8cMjKMCoQl9Ue4GhUGdbH/qfC69 3TxlwxKyrqLs5jbNEz1XjpsTTqk1vtWV7lf7EW4Uc71mtrK/9qByT6lV4BJzzZ/V kt49GQwO9jQB3CIdCJoPE18cygrvB67ZJ7oz1o6Lg5LKVt6CB4/LYsqWXZLczFTh J07t/4SvjkI= Original-Received: from a-pb-sasl-quonix. (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF076C6E93; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 17:49:15 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from unquote.localdomain (unknown [81.39.161.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 28A12C6E92; Tue, 20 Jul 2010 17:49:12 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <878wdjpt4z.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> (Neil Jerram's message of "Thu, 03 Dec 2009 22:52:44 +0000") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: A43831CA-9448-11DF-87BA-9056EE7EF46B-02397024!a-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:10710 Archived-At: Just pulling things back together here: On Thu 03 Dec 2009 23:52, Neil Jerram writes: > Neil Jerram writes: > >> [...] wondering whether and how we >> will provide similar debugging facilities for compiled code as we have >> in 1.8.x for interpreted code. > > Some more thoughts here, to try to build a complete new picture. > > Things that we can do quite nicely in 1.8.x are: > - stack inspection > - seeing the frames and what is happening, for context > - mapping back to source code > - querying variable values > - evaluating an expression in a frame's local environment > - breakpoints > - tracing > - single stepping. > > We should try to include profiling and code coverage in the picture. We can do all this in 1.9/2.0 now, except breakpoints and single stepping, and evaluating in the context of a frame isn't accessible right now. I want to fix the breakpoints and stepping situation soonish, though. Andy -- http://wingolog.org/