Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!mcsun!ukc!cam-cl!news
From: ksh@ely.cl.cam.ac.uk (Kish Shen)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.prolog
Subject: Re: better than 4-port debugger
Message-ID: <1991Jun24.231614.1474@cl.cam.ac.uk>
Date: 24 Jun 91 23:16:14 GMT
References: <1793@usage.csd.unsw.oz.au>
Sender: news@cl.cam.ac.uk (The news facility)
Reply-To: ksh@ely.cl.cam.ac.uk (Kish Shen)
Organization: Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge
Lines: 21

Tim Menzies writes (about a 4 port debugger):

>but is bad as a view of that model. recently, i was doing some
>partial evaluation work and the strutures i was generating filled
>several lines on my 4-port debugger. what i would have prefered

Have you tried SICStus' debugger? This is basically the standard 4 port
debugger,
but like Quntus' debugger, if the clause is too large (has subterms which are
nested too deeply or has too many arguments), it is not displayed fully, so the
structures would not occupied many lines. In addition, SICStus allows you to
"navigate" around the structures, i.e. you can request the display of subterms
you are interested in. This seem to provide what I think you want, but without
the nice window interface, and staying within the box model. I certainly
found it
extremely useful, but I am biased (:-)), as I proposed this feature for
SICStus.

--Kish Shen

(ksh@cl.cam.ac.uk)