If you used a real man's programming language like Lisp or ML then you would have no need for gdb and it's (false) friends.
Having to debug a program is (IMO) a sign of sloppiness and shows that what you've set out to do is beyond your intellectual capacity to bring to completion.
Name:
Anonymous2005-04-25 13:35
plz teach me in the lisp/ml ways of mercyless extermination of bugs, oh enlightened one!
Name:
Anonymous2005-04-25 15:03
mmmmm.... nope... debugging is not based only on logical errors, ANYONE can make a mistake writing some variable incorrectly or some function with a wrong declaration... or since when you see a person with perfect caligraphy or spelling skills? or tell me if you have compiled a LISP program that has missing ")" and you spend hours looking for it? STFU
I see the need for debugging in your case - you can't even master the syntax of the English language.
Name:
Anonymous2005-04-28 7:08 (sage)
>>7 is either a complete idiot, or a wannabie troll.
(oh no! the commas!)
Name:
Anonymous2005-05-01 3:00
>>1
Never mind that in any software engineering development process, there is ALWAYS a debug/revision subprocess, iterative or not. Never mind that professional IDEs always have a way to create debug builds. Never mind that companies spend millions of dollars on hiring test engineers to design and execute unit testing on code to debug it. Never mind that corporations stake their existance on using and releasing testing suites year after year after year.
Go back to writing your "Hello, World!" programs and STFU.
Name:
Anonymous2005-05-01 9:22
People also like to use Java and Windows, and more generally people also like to murder, rape, start wars and believe that a two housand year old Jew on a stick is a God. And then there are people like you who use argumentum ad populum.
Name:
Anonymous2005-05-02 1:31
That's one way to look at it. The other way is to note that those tools are tested and understood. They may not be perfect languages, but more factors need to be considered in the selection of a language than beauty alone.
Which doesn't change that >>1 is both a fucktard and a troll. You have to debug ML and other functional languages too. You do get rid of a large set of bugs and errors, but not all of them.
Name:
Anonymous2005-05-28 23:40
People who have erasers on their pencils are stupid. Anyone who ever needs to erase anything they write down is obviously so stupid that they should never be allowed to write again.
You need to improve your trolling skills. Any serious application is subject to have bugs in any language it's written - say you have two bools, user and luser, and have to do stuff like (pseudocode):
if (user)
display "Command incorrect"
else if (luser)
display "Call somebody who knows"
You can easily mess with user and luser in any language, any way this is done.
Go back to your Visual Basic .Net and leave the talking to the real men.
Name:
Anonymous2005-06-02 6:38 (sage)
>>26
Go back to your AOL and leave the trolling to the real men.
Name:
Anonymous2005-06-03 3:58 (sage)
I'll second Anonymous-san #25.
Name:
Anonymous2005-06-18 3:23 (sage)
When I'm the Jesus of programming, I'll follow your lead.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-03 9:23
THIS THREAD IS AWESOME!
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-03 10:27
A proper language, proper skill, proper IDE with proper syntax highlighting and unit testing = reasonably bug free program.
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-03 11:27
real man's programming language like Lisp or ML
More like a faggot language for people who can't debug so they spend all their time thinking and write the correct code in the first place... Oh wait...
Name:
Anonymous2007-10-03 11:32
>>1
SML/NJ used to be distributed with a debugger. It was a pretty cool debugger because you could step it backwards as well as forwards.
Name:
Anonymous2009-01-15 9:19
LISP
Name:
Anonymous2009-01-15 12:06
>>3 or tell me if you have compiled a LISP program that has missing ")" and you spend hours looking for it?
That has never happened.
>>31 IDE syntax highlighting
I loled. What does utter faggotry have to do with bugs?