Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Visual debugging in secondary files #56

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 22, 2021
Merged

Conversation

jfehrle
Copy link
Member

@jfehrle jfehrle commented Apr 20, 2021

Looking for general feedback--is this a reasonable plan?

Rendered: https://github.com/jfehrle/ceps/blob/debugger_gui/text/056-debugger-gui.md

@jfehrle
Copy link
Member Author

jfehrle commented Apr 20, 2021

Proposed appearance of the GUI with debugger panels:

debugger3

Appearance of breakpoints (red background) and the debugger stopping point (dark blue)--already implemented but not submitted:

image

@jfehrle jfehrle marked this pull request as ready for review April 20, 2021 05:05
On the other hand, we shouldn't go out of our way to support multiple
simultaneous debug sessions--following a single debug session already requires
very close attention by the user.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Another detail: If two debug sessions stop in the same file, how do you highlight 2 stopping points? The stopping point highlight would need to change based on the which debugger tab is active.

@Alizter
Copy link

Alizter commented Apr 29, 2021

As we discussed in the coq call, I think it would be better to only allow one debug session per process of coqide. This will simplify the design and avoid headache for the user.

@jfehrle
Copy link
Member Author

jfehrle commented May 18, 2021

@Zimmi48 Perhaps you would merge this?

@Zimmi48
Copy link
Member

Zimmi48 commented May 22, 2021

@jfehrle is this up-to-date with the current implementation plans? If not, maybe you want to add a note on what changed.

@jfehrle
Copy link
Member Author

jfehrle commented May 22, 2021

Yes, it's current. OTOH this CEP is meant to give some analysis, suggest alternative approaches and facilitate a discussion in order to get feedback on the ideas. It's now a historical artifact. It's not a spec, nor is it user or internal documentation, so updating it seems unnecessary. Nor do I consider it as constraining the implementation, either--if I come up with better ideas during the development process, I may adopt them and then (if necessary) defend those changes during the review process.

The last part of the user documentation (#14381) reflects the discussion of the CEP.

@Zimmi48 Zimmi48 merged commit 977d4ad into coq:master May 22, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants