Re: jdb bug and quick fix

At Sat, 10 Nov 2007 11:16:09 +0900,
Ke Lu wrote:
> 
> Sorry,I didn't say anything about remove jdb from jdee.
> My advice is remove jdebug.(not jdb)
> There are three type of debugger in jdee,
> jdb,old jdb and jdebug.

So sorry, I misunderstood.  Please accept my apologies.  I'm glad that
everyone agrees that jdb is a good thing.

> Carlos Konstanski <[email protected]> writes:
> > On Fri, 9 Nov 2007, Paul Landes wrote:
> >
> >> Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 09:15:50 -0600
> >> From: Paul Landes <[email protected]>
> >> To: Ke Lu <[email protected]>
> >> Cc: [email protected]
> >> Subject: Re: jdb bug and quick fix
> >>
> >> We should at least take a poll as to who might be using a feature
> >> before we just start removing things.
> >>
> >> Have we asked who might be willing to maintain it first?
> >>
> >
> > Thank you.  You can count me among those who would be extremely
> > dismayed if jdb were removed.  What is the point of removing it?  If you don't
> > like it, don't use it.  Linux is about choices.  But I assume too much; perhaps
> > Ke Lu is a windows, solaris or mac user.
> >
> > I am willing to take part in maintaining JDEE.  Taking on the job all by myself
> > would be a bit much.  Can we get a short list of folks who are
> > willing to take part in a maintenance committee?
> >
> >>
> >> Ke Lu writes:
> >> > Carlos Konstanski <[email protected]> writes:
> >> >
> >> > > I prefer jdb over jdebug because jdb has enough functionality for 99%
> >> > > of my debugging needs, and less gizmos and knobs in the way.  (Jdebug
> >> > > is indespensible for some situations.)  But there is a bug that
> >> > > affects code-stepping in jdb.  You can step through code, but the
> >> > > pointer in the left gutter of the source buffer cannot track the
> >> > > current line because of a stringp type error.  The error occurs during
> >> > > the routine for finding the source buffer.  Here's the quick fix:
> >> > >
> >> > > In jde-util.el, the function (jde-find-class-source-file) has these as
> >> > > the first 2 lines:
> >> > >
> >> > >   (let* ((verified-name (jde-parse-class-exists class))
> >> > >          (outer-class (jde-remove-inner-class verified-name))
> >> > >
> >> > > This would be good if (jde-parse-class-exists) returned a string, but
> >> > > it returns a boolean instead.  The call to (jde-remove-inner-class)
> >> > > throws a '(type stringp nil) error as a result.  Change the code to:
> >> > >
> >> > >   (let* ((verified-name (jde-parse-class-exists class))
> >> > >          (outer-class (jde-remove-inner-class class))
> >> > >
> >> > > `class' is the passed-in string argument to
> >> > > (jde-find-class-source-file).  This is the quick fix.  It seems to
> >> > > work like it needs to.  But this makes the logical flow in this
> >> > > function less than ideal.  If we're going to call
> >> > > (jde-parse-class-exists) to validate the input, we should do something
> >> > > with that validation before doing more stuff, or fail gracefully.
> >> > > Something like:
> >> > >
> >> > >   (if (jde-parse-class-exists class)
> >> > >     (let ((outer-class (jde-remove-inner-class class)))
> >> > >       (do-stuff)
> >> > >       ...)
> >> > >     (signal-no-src-found class))
> >> > >
> >> > > I will try to spend some time refactoring this function and submitting
> >> > > it for review.
> >> > >
> >> > > Carlos Konstanski
> >> > It seems jdee will be moved to sourceforge this weekend.
> >> > I agree the jdebugger is not too stable to use and
> >> > I advice to remove it in the future.
> >> > Another problem is:
> >> > jdb in jdee can't work well when The user.language is not en.
> >> > My advice is:
> >> > if it is difficult to parse muti-lanuage msg of jdb's output,
> >> > Please set -J-Duser.language=en to jdb options by hard coding,
> >> > (including options of nomal debug, attach to socket and attach to share memory)
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> -- 
> >> Paul Landes
> >> [email protected]
> >>
> >
> > Carlos Konstanski