From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


I'm fixin' to remove the "Notable debuggers" section completely, and replace it with a link to Category:Debuggers, which is more complete, doesn't have linkspam, and so on. Anyone object? -- Mikeblas 02:10, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

agreed: the really few, historic debuggers (GDB, dbx debugger, etc.) can be in the "See also list".
I think that remedy should be added to this list because it was the first multithreaded visualization debugger and

over the next few years it will be the primary interface style that all debuggers go to for debugging large multicore systems, gpus etc. Remedy Debugger May 29, 2008 Peterkimrowe (talk) 23:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

the "Remarkable debuggers" section includes tools that have no debugging in their own spec, like Daedalus.
--Hgfernan 14:41, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

good plan... —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:23, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Where to mention debugging formats ?[edit]

which do you think is the best place to mension debugging formats like DWARF and stabs ? here or in debugging --Hgfernan 14:35, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Proposal to rewrite Debugger article[edit]

I propose a major rewrite of the Debugger article. Although I find nothing factually wrong with it, and it includes many important points, I feel that it does not read clearly for someone who doesn't already understand what a debugger is, nor does it mention the most essential points up front. A preliminary outline of my proposed rewrite is as follows:

Introduction: A debugger is a computer program which is used as a tool by a programmer to view and control the internal workings of another program at a very detailed level. This second program is said to be running under (the) debugger.

View & control: Controlling execution (single-step, suspend/resume); examining variables during suspension; breakpoints, crashes, exceptions.

Purposes of using a debugger: The term "debugger" is somewhat of a misnomer, in that a debugger does not itself debug code. Although a debugger can be of great assistance to a programmer in debugging code, a debugger is equally useful for analyzing and understanding the operation of an existing program, without any intention of diagnosing bugs. This understanding can be used to document the program, or to modify it. A debugger is a particularly important tool for hackers.

source-level debuggers vs machine-language debugger


program behavior may differ when running under a debugger (execution speed, timing issues, different compile options)

If there is general agreement to rewrite this article somewhat along these lines, I'll definitely want lots of help from previous contributors. (By the way, this is my very first attempt to contribute to Wikipedia, so please let me know if I've violated protocol.)

Bill Rubin 21:21, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Agreed wholeheartedly; I'd also like to see coverage of:
OS Interfaces
ie, ptrace, procfs, Win32, hardware-level, simulation, etc
hardware debug registers, how a software breakpoint works
Symbolic Debugging
How opcode-level debugging tools interface with source languages
High Level Languages
Quick overview of how Java and C# provide debugger interfaces
Advanced Techniques
User mode single stepping, hit tracing, detours, hooking

--- tqbf 19:33, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Kim Rowe 21:21, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

This is a totally simplistic view from the point of view of source code only debugging. Rethink this in terms of trying to solve the problem of debugging a system and the feature set changes completely. I'd also like to see coverage of:
OS Interfaces
Multiple processes and multiple threads
Display of debugging information using a variety of techniques
High level models for debugging
Simulation and debugging —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peterkimrowe (talkcontribs) 17:53, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
Much of this remains undone, and be useful to have in the article. — Lentower (talk) 19:52, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Proposed merge from Debugger front-end[edit]

As the Debugger front-end article is a subtopic of Debugger, and the articles are not particularly long, I have proposed a merge. --Snigbrook (talk) 21:01, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Who knows - the entire debugger section has the wrong slant as far as I'm concerned. It misses what debuggers are intended to do. ... - April 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peterkimrowe (talkcontribs) 17:54, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Saved/rescued external links[edit]

I start to save/rescue external links that are added to this article per Nov-26-2010 in this section, so that they are not lost , but also do not further pollute the article. I'm considering to move relevant links to the Open Directory Project.

  • see link added here [1]
  • see link added here [2]

Ptrb (talk) 14:29, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Lacks a history section[edit]

A history section with notable early implementations (and related languages) would be nice. (talk) 03:21, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

This remains undone. Assuming citations can be found:
  • Include any discussion of debugging by Babbage & Lovelace in their work on his Difference Engine, & anything significant from then to the first real computer.
  • Be better to just mention significant first implementations -- those that added significant features, or were the first on a type of computer architecture.
  • Be better to just mention the first implementation for classes of languges: procedural, functional, etc.
  • Be good to cover the the first debuggers for intrepreted vs. compliled languages.
Lentower (talk) 19:47, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Network & network application debuggers[edit]

Assuming citations can be found, new sections on debugging network protocols and network programs (e.g. server/client applications) would be a very useful addition. — Lentower (talk) 15:26, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

Using packet analyzers, or using some other form of tool? Guy Harris (talk) 18:03, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
All classes/types of network debugging tools that are citable. — Lentower (talk) 19:00, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Packet analyzers have their own page, so I'm not sure that would deserve more than a brief note, if that. If there are other network debugging tools, that might be more worthy of note, although this page mainly discusses programs that debug the behavior of an individual program rather than of a system, so perhaps network debugging would belong in a separate article. Guy Harris (talk) 19:18, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, packet analyzers would be a small paragraph in this section. — Lentower (talk) 19:59, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

System vs program debuggers[edit]

Guy Harris mentions above that this article is about tools for debugging individual programs, not systems of programs. And that network and network system debuggers are a sub-set of system debuggers.

Be a useful addition to this article to discuss all this — Lentower (talk) 19:59, 7 May 2015 (UTC)