On 29Oct2018 1709, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> I also wonder if it would be useful to give pdb the ability to break
> when an exception is *raised*, rather than when it's caught?
This is basically the first feature I implemented as an intern at
Microsoft back in 2011 :) (for Visual Studio's Python de
On 10/29/2018 3:07 PM, Greg Ewing wrote:
When I have a bug that only happens after hours of run
time, I try to find a much shorter test case that reproduces
it.
Mmm. Yeah. But that's often a guessing game, with a low chance of success.
___
Python-Dev
On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 11:10 AM Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> I also wonder if it would be useful to give pdb the ability to break
> when an exception is *raised*, rather than when it's caught?
This is veering into python-ideas territory (or even python-list), but
the first big concern that comes to
On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 11:59 AM, Chris Jerdonek
wrote:
> A simpler feature that could possibly help him (assuming there isn't any
> external state to deal with) would be the ability to save everything at a
> certain point in time, and then resume it later. He could rig things up to
> save the sta
When I have a bug that only happens after hours of run
time, I try to find a much shorter test case that reproduces
it.
--
Greg
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
https://m
I have another idea on this. What about the idea of starting the program,
and then a few minutes later, starting the same program a second time. If
the first program errors, you could examine the second one which is a
little bit behind. Before starting the second one, perhaps you could even
make a
A simpler feature that could possibly help him (assuming there isn't any
external state to deal with) would be the ability to save everything at a
certain point in time, and then resume it later. He could rig things up to
save the state e.g. after every hour: 1 hour, 2 hours, etc. Then if an
error
Hi,
On Sat, 27 Oct 2018 at 01:50, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> [...]
> > So I was wondering if it would be possible to keep that context around
> > if you are in the debugger and rewind the execution point to before
> > the statement was triggered.
>
> I think what you are looking for is a reverse de
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 04:18:37PM -0700, Ed Peschko wrote:
> all,
>
> I was debugging a very long script that I was not all that familiar
> with, and I was doing my familiar routine of being very careful in
> evaluating expressions to make sure that I didn't hit such statements
> as:
>
> TypeErr
all,
I was debugging a very long script that I was not all that familiar
with, and I was doing my familiar routine of being very careful in
evaluating expressions to make sure that I didn't hit such statements
as:
TypeError: unsupported operand type(s) for +: 'int' and 'str'
anyways the script h
10 matches
Mail list logo