crazy debugging idea

[gusl]

When debugging, we sometimes observe information being transformed on the GUI, and we want to know *WHO* is doing that processing. Say, you want to find out who is sorting the string "d-f-a" into "a-d-f".

If you don't know the source that well (which is always the case in large enough projects), this can be very time-consuming.

My solution:
Write a script to modify ALL methods in your source that take strings. The script will add to the beginning of these methods the following code:

if (s.equals("d-f-a")){ //CRAZY-DEBUGGER
   System.out.println("foo: s = " + s); //CRAZY-DEBUGGER
} //CRAZY-DEBUGGER

for each method foo and string s in the list of arguments. For methods taking two strings, the scripts adds the above code twice.

*Even* if you forget to back-up your code, the prints are very easy to remove, since they all have string "//CRAZY-DEBUGGER" in them.


But this is only a hack towards my general goal: transparency between code and interface. Mapping visual properties (i.e. the user's concepts) into variables (i.e. the programmer's concepts) should be automatic.

Am I the only one with this dream?

Comments

[ikeepaleopard]

You seem to have invented a poor man's version of aspects.

[simrob.livejournal.com]

You stole my comment!

[tiedyedave]

You stole my comment too!

[ikeepaleopard]

After I stole it from you and Rob, I gave it to Gustavo. If you want it, you'll have to get it back from him.

[tiedyedave]

It's about aspects. He can keep it, thanks. :-)

[simrob.livejournal.com]

Can't I just rewrite the function in which you gave it to Gustavo in order to make so you gave it to me first?

[ikeepaleopard]

I'm not implmeneted using aspects. I have proper abstraction boundaries.

[simrob.livejournal.com]

Curse you and your sound induction principles!

I'm not sure induction priciples are relevant here, but I thought of the phrase and decided to use it anyway.

[darius.livejournal.com]

Totally reasonable dream. Squeak, Self, and Boxer are some systems that do better at it than the mainstream stuff.

[gwillen.livejournal.com]

I have a perl script which does what you ask for.

This is probably not the same as what you want. :-)

[gwillen.livejournal.com]

Er, actually, my script does what you ask for, for Javascript, where every function declaration matches "function .*?(.*?).*?{". Java actually having types would make that somewhat harder, but you could do it heuristically.

[peamasii.livejournal.com]

I found this related recommendation on the Sun Java forums:

a) Learn to use the log4j package ( http://logging.apache.org/log4j/docs/index.html ), it does exactly what you want to do. You can download and study its source code. Knowing log4j is a must for every Java programmer that works with J2EE - it is THE standard.
b) If you're using JDK 1.4 or later, and you really want to write your logging class, you can use the class java.lang.StackTraceElement (check the javadoc). It is easier to use than the method that Log4J used for determining the method and class - it is because Log4J must run in older JDK versions.