Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!hellgate.utah.edu!caen!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ncar!midway!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!pequod.cso.uiuc.edu!dorner
From: dorner@pequod.cso.uiuc.edu (Steve Dorner)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: Does anyone know anything about new Apple development products?
Message-ID: <1991Feb13.215508.20111@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: 13 Feb 91 21:55:08 GMT
References: <1991Feb12.141258.1@gsbacd.uchicago.edu> <1991Feb13.010016.6901@lynx.CS.ORST.EDU> <1991Feb13.050326.24115@verity.com>
Sender: news@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (News)
Organization: University of Illinois at U-C
Lines: 24

In article <1991Feb13.050326.24115@verity.com> anders@verity.com (Anders Wallgren) writes:
>No, it will not be replacing SADE.  It is meant to be an everyday
>tool, but SADE will still stay around.  The phrase I heard used was
>"80% solution..."

Could somebody describe the new debugger a bit more?  How is it different
from SADE?

Apple is going to have TWO source-level debuggers, and one of them is
going to be SADE?  Isn't that kind of like having two lines of mid-sized
cars, one of them being an Edsel?

SADE is the worst source-level debugger I have ever used.  It has a few
nice ideas, but some of it is so bizarre that I can't imagine why
anyone wants to do anything but trash it.

I know it's programmable, and maybe I could fix it if I spent a few months
writing SADE procedures, but I don't *WANT* to program my debugger, I want
to debug my program!

Anybody want to port gdb?
--
Steve Dorner, U of Illinois Computing Services Office
Internet: s-dorner@uiuc.edu  UUCP: uunet!uiucuxc!uiuc.edu!s-dorner