Skip to main content
42 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Sep 18, 2016 at 18:43 comment added Qix - MONICA WAS MISTREATED @BlueRaja-DannyPflughoeft That's an incredibly opinionated statement. I used to use "integrated" debuggers all the time and prefer lldb over Eclipse any day of the week. I'm 23; am I "so far behind the times"?
Jan 12, 2013 at 19:59 comment added Pablo Ariel @dietbuddha I understand, but I believe the more you code the more chances that you will need a debugger. Even if you are good or know the code enough to look right into the function or code that is failing, the debugger can make finding things faster, as do the subversion, the code analyzer, etc. Of course depending on the language and the kind of application you make, you may need it (or care) less. Maybe if your application makes use of complex deterministic math functions or if you perform custom memory management, then the debugger can help much more, it would be smart to use it often.
Jan 10, 2013 at 3:49 comment added iteratingself @PabloAriel That's why I said most of the time and not all the time. I do use the debugger sometimes, but not often. To me it is more a question of what your first approach is. Do you immediately jump into the debugger, or do you already know (within a few lines) where the problem is because you've read and understand the code.
Jan 10, 2013 at 3:35 comment added Pablo Ariel @dietbuddha there are things that cannot be easily fixed without a debugger, specially if you have a deadline for a project and you just landed in a company where all the code is a mess and there are not enough automated tests to cover all posibilities. Plus there are things that can't be automated, you can be working in a graphics rendering software or even simulations where all your perceptions are required to test everything you can. Of course you can easily guess the fix for many of them but you can't automate, and there are cases where you can automate but is not easy to find a fix.
Jan 8, 2013 at 22:01 comment added iteratingself @PabloAriel I've worked on plenty of code that I didn't write. I've coded in many languages, scripting and compiled; and I've found simply reading the code and understanding the intent usually lead me to the bug, not always, but most of the time. Our automated tests usually tell me everything I need to know to fix a bug.
Jan 7, 2013 at 18:25 comment added Pablo Ariel @dietbuddha it seems you never worked in code someone else wrote. BTW it seems those "good" programmers also never worked on other code than their own.
Aug 12, 2012 at 17:09 comment added user1249 The basic problem is a computer never tells you anything unless instructed to. Using a debugger you can learn the things the programmer did not explicitly ask to be told.
Aug 12, 2012 at 15:40 history edited user CC BY-SA 3.0
removed unnecessary dead link
Jun 12, 2011 at 21:06 comment added iteratingself Perhaps you should have asked if good programmer's use debuggers. The best programmers I seen spend a fraction of time thinking about what the nature of the bug is and then jump immediately to the correct piece of code and fix it. They almost never use a debugger.
May 31, 2011 at 21:23 comment added BlueRaja - Danny Pflughoeft Experienced programmers who "don't use debuggers" are probably thinking in terms of gdb/SoftICE, and have never used an actual integrated-debugger (and probably don't use an IDE for that matter). They are so far behind the times it's painful.
May 29, 2011 at 12:15 comment added janm I've been developing since the mid '80s and using a debugger has always been rare for me. The only one I used semi-regularly was SoftICE, and looking back, it helped in many cases, but it was a crutch that delayed the reasoning about the problem that actually led to the solution. I see a developer depending on a debugger as a problem.
May 25, 2011 at 15:41 comment added Rein Henrichs I like special badges. You forgot "voting to close".
May 25, 2011 at 13:31 comment added Smandoli @Rein H. -- special Badge for you ... something about linking to a HILARIOUSLY FUNNY cartoon, while refraining from using that in an "answer", while voting the question down.
May 21, 2011 at 22:00 comment added blueberryfields Most existing debuggers are old-fashioned, have crappy interfaces, and require the programmer know and understand concepts and paradigms that are difficult to master, and, nowadays, not fair to expect most programmers to use or know. As a result, most modern, experienced programmers, go to great lengths to learn the skills necessary to write the kind of code that rarely ever has to be debugged in a debugger, to avoid the pain of the experience. So "yes they use it" and "as little as possible"
May 21, 2011 at 21:56 comment added user1842 I don't know why this was closed, but since I'm not 3k I can't vote to re-open. I won't add another me too answer, but I just use the debuggers that are built into my ide's, so I can use breakpoints when needed.
May 21, 2011 at 19:46 comment added Piskvor left the building @Rein Henrichs: Nicely put. @OP: See also: The Story Of Mel (Some of you might have read this before; I know I have ;))
S May 21, 2011 at 19:08 answer added jokoon timeline score: 0
S May 21, 2011 at 19:08 history made wiki Post Made Community Wiki by jokoon
May 21, 2011 at 19:03 history closed Steven A. Lowe
Walter
Macneil
Rein Henrichs
Adam Lear
not constructive
May 21, 2011 at 18:59 answer added Thomas Padron-McCarthy timeline score: 1
May 21, 2011 at 18:55 answer added Martin james timeline score: 2
May 21, 2011 at 18:49 comment added Rein Henrichs Real programmers, of course, use butterflies
May 21, 2011 at 18:45 answer added JeffO timeline score: 3
May 21, 2011 at 18:12 history tweeted twitter.com/#!/StackProgrammer/status/72001858411053056
May 21, 2011 at 17:59 answer added Job timeline score: 28
May 21, 2011 at 17:49 answer added Frank Shearar timeline score: 3
May 21, 2011 at 17:43 answer added Darknight timeline score: 12
May 21, 2011 at 17:38 answer added Martin Wickman timeline score: 1
S May 21, 2011 at 17:30 history suggested user3571 CC BY-SA 3.0
removed noise
May 21, 2011 at 17:30 answer added Adam Byrtek timeline score: 17
May 21, 2011 at 17:15 comment added E.Z. Hart Neil - you keep saying you have no desire to use a debugger. Is this because you don't write bugs in the first place, because you instrument your code in ways that make a debugger unnecessary, or because you write your code in a way that makes "debug by reading source" easier/faster than using a debugger? Or is it the real-time situation Luke Graham mentions below?
May 21, 2011 at 17:09 comment added Kevin @Wooble: the basic question "do experienced programmers use debuggers" is a good one. It actually surprised me that it set off a mini holy war.
May 21, 2011 at 17:04 answer added Luke Graham timeline score: 8
May 21, 2011 at 16:58 review Suggested edits
S May 21, 2011 at 17:30
May 21, 2011 at 16:56 history migrated from stackoverflow.com (revisions)
May 21, 2011 at 16:53 comment added mj82 It's like asking if experienced programmers are using keyboard... I don't understand what experience has to do with it - do you think they're Gods and create perfect- working code without errors from beginning? And even if so what does it mean to you - will you stop using debugeer when you need and star saying: "I don't use debugger so I'm reaa programmer"... :) BTW. I doubt any professional will answer such a question...
May 21, 2011 at 16:52 answer added GolezTrol timeline score: 2
May 21, 2011 at 16:51 answer added Andrew Bullock timeline score: 3
May 21, 2011 at 16:49 answer added Kevin timeline score: 4
May 21, 2011 at 16:48 answer added mikerobi timeline score: 46
May 21, 2011 at 16:47 answer added hvgotcodes timeline score: 7
May 21, 2011 at 16:45 history asked Neil Butterworth CC BY-SA 3.0