Thoughts about D

[Iain Buclaw]

On 3 December 2017 at 08:29, Richard Delorme via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, 2 December 2017 at 23:44:39 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>>
>> On 12/2/2017 4:38 AM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>>>
>>> But then you need to bloat your program with debug info in order to
>>> understand what, why, and how things went wrong.
>>
>>
>> Most of the time (for me) that isn't necessary, because the debugger still
>> shows where it failed and that's enough.
>>
>> Besides, you can always rerun the test case with a debug build.
>
>
> +1
> To me, the current D assert is useless, and I prefer to use a C-like
> equivalent, that "crash" the program without unwinding the stack. Then I can
> inspect the cause of the crash on a debugger, with access to the current
> context (variable contents, etc.), is it from a (core file) or by running
> the program on the debugger. That way I do find the bug(s) much faster.
> More generally treating errors (ie bugs) as unrecoverable exceptions is a
> mistake in IMHO. I prefer a call to the C function abort() that leaves the
> context intact.
>

Core dumps are of no use if there's no debug info. ;-)