On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 7:39 AM, Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 7:58 PM, Nathaniel Smith <njs at pobox.com> wrote:
>> This would also avoid confusion with IPython's very
>> useful debug magic:
>> https://ipython.readthedocs.io/en/stable/interactive/magics.html#magic-debug
>> and which might also be worth stealing for the builtin REPL.
>> (Personally I use it way more often than set_trace().)
>
> Interesting. I’m not an IPython user. Do you think its %debug magic would benefit from PEP 553?
Not in particular. But if you're working on making debugger entry more
discoverable/human-friendly, then providing a friendlier alias for the
pdb.pm() semantics might be useful too?
Actually, if you look at the pdb docs, the 3 ways of entering the
debugger that merit demonstrations at the top of the manual page are:
pdb.run("...code...") # "I want to debug this code"
pdb.set_trace() # "break here"
pdb.pm() # "wtf just happened?"
The set_trace() name is particularly opaque, but if we're talking
about adding a friendly debugger abstraction layer then I'd at least
think about whether to make it cover all three of these.
-n
--
Nathaniel J. Smith -- https://vorpus.org
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4