Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!ns-mx!ccad.uiowa.edu!cadsi
From: cadsi@ccad.uiowa.edu (CADSI)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer
Subject: Re: Tools to Debug UAE under Windows?
Message-ID: <1991May29.153911.10856@ccad.uiowa.edu>
Date: 29 May 91 15:39:11 GMT
Article-I.D.: ccad.1991May29.153911.10856
References: <1991May29.042848.27579@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>
Distribution: usa
Organization: CAD-Research, U. of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa
Lines: 19

From article <1991May29.042848.27579@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, by ebergman@isis.cs.du.edu (Eric Bergman-Terrell):
> 
> Are you saying that Codeview + Debugging Kernel are not satisfactory?  The
> reason I ask is that I'm tempted to buy the SDK just for the debugging
> kernel...
> 
> If Codeview + Debugging Kernel aren't satisfactory, please let me know why.
> 

I have used them and still do.  I find them satisfactory myself.  This is
gonna bring up LOTS of opinions.  This is just one of 'em.  There are
many reasons to own the SDK.  Debugging Kernels are just one.  There
are some other utilities that are real nice (Spy, Heapwalk, ...)

|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|Tom Hite					|  The views expressed by me |
|Manager, Product development			|  are mine, not necessarily |
|CADSI (Computer Aided Design Software Inc.	|  the views of CADSI.       |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|