Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!spool.mu.edu!munnari.oz.au!goanna!ok
From: ok@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au (Richard A. O'Keefe)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.prolog
Subject: Re: Poor state of Mac Prologs
Message-ID: <6403@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au>
Date: 20 Jun 91 11:12:04 GMT
References: <421@daily-planet.concordia.ca> <6379@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au> <1991Jun19.221421.7975@swift.cs.tcd.ie>
Organization: Comp Sci, RMIT, Melbourne, Australia
Lines: 22

In article <1991Jun19.221421.7975@swift.cs.tcd.ie>, brady@swift.cs.tcd.ie writes:
> I'm still looking for a nicer debugging system than
> the standard 4-port one. Any civilised debugger should have access to the
> source code. Obviously, there are some problems with that in Prolog, but they
> aren't insurmountable, given a little time...

What exactly is it you don't like about the 4-port debugger?
(There are other models around; the 5-port debugger, AORTA, BIM's one.)
Source code access is an entirely orthogonal issue.  Running QP under
(UniPress or GNU) Emacs, at any of the four ports you can type a dot "."
and there you are at the source code.  All you have to do is keep track
of where things come from (see `source_file' in the Quintus manuals).

Have you see LPA Prolog for the Mac?  Navigating around the source code
on that system seems rather pleasant.

> No doubt my system has bugs in it, but user feedback would improve matters
> there.

Hint.
-- 
I agree with Jim Giles about many of the deficiencies of present UNIX.