Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!uunet!mcsun!ub4b!kulcs!hera.cs.kuleuven.ac.be
From: bimbart@hera.cs.kuleuven.ac.be (Bart Demoen)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.prolog
Subject: 4-port debugger (was: Poor state of Mac Prologs)
Message-ID: <4055@n-kulcs.cs.kuleuven.ac.be>
Date: 21 Jun 91 07:11:13 GMT
Sender: news@cs.kuleuven.ac.be
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science (K.U.Leuven)
Lines: 18
Originator: bimbart@hera.cs.kuleuven.ac.be

In article <6403@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au> ok@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au
(Richard A. O'Keefe) writes:

> What exactly is it you don't like about the 4-port debugger?

it is the slower way to debug
also, trying to debug a program you didn't write yourself, is more painful with
the 4-port debugger, as compared to a source oriented debugger
I am not saying that the 4-port debugger is completely useless, but perhaps
nearly so

> (There are other models around; the 5-port debugger, AORTA, BIM's one.)

forget about 5-port debugging in ProLog by BIM as well: it is still there,
but once you use the source oriented debugging tool (which looks very much
like dbxtool) you will not want to use the port debugger any more

Bart Demoen