which is the best debugger?
dai...@usa.net
That's the question:
in your humble opinion, which is the best debugger
you have seen?
There are some features you must look:
- Memory requirements
- Features
- CPU needed
and another things.
If U can, tell me your experience and if it runs in a 286
(I own one, the one which i use every day).
Jeremy Cooke
dai...@usa.net wrote in article <88843444...@linux2.bluegrass.net>...
> in your humble opinion, which is the best debugger
> you have seen?
...
> If U can, tell me your experience and if it runs in a 286
> (I own one, the one which i use every day).
What about for 386, 486, and pentium processors?
Jeremy Cooke
Jeremy Cooke
Jeremy Cooke
Pierre Vandevenne
>If U can, tell me your experience and if it runs in a 286
>(I own one, the one which i use every day).
On a 286 ? Old versions of Turbo Debugger by Borland. My favourite was
PFIX at the time, but it may simply be impossible to find now.
I certainly don't want to sound bad and I understand that you may have your
own reasons for running a 286, but debugging really made a giant leap forward
with the 386. If you can change your mobo to a 386, even a 386 SX 16,
that is well worth the trouble.
---
Pierre Vandevenne, MD - http://www.datarescue.com
IDA Pro 3.7 adds multi pass analysis, stack variables, symbolic constants,
unicode, ELF support, color highlighting, C++ name demangling to compiler
library recognition - IDA Pro 3.7 : a stunning disassembler !
David Lindauer
Jeremy Cooke wrote:
> dai...@usa.net wrote in article <88843444...@linux2.bluegrass.net>...
> What about for 386, 486, and pentium processors?
hey, I won't say my debugger is best, but it sure does beat debug! Does most
things
that debug does, supports processors up to the pentium, has lots of features
like hardware debugging and numeric coprocessor debugging and options
and even a basic command line history! Go to my computer page (see sig)
and look for GRDB. The latest on-net version is 1.3, but, version 1.4 is ready
and I've got someone who has indicated an interest in adding lots of new
features!
David
--
---------------------------------------------------------
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Station/5196/index.html (home page)
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Station/5196/ttc.html (tao te ching)
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Station/5196/treasure.html (computer page)
some people say he's dreaming, but he's not the only one.
- the beatles
Gautier.De...@maths.unine.ch
Path: news!anmontmollin
From: Gautier.De...@maths.unine.ch (Gautier)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.asm.x86
Subject: Re: which is the best debugger?
Message-ID: <1998Mar2.122107.6571@news>
Date: 2 Mar 98 12:21:07 MET
References: <88843444...@linux2.bluegrass.net>
Reply-To: Remove_this.Gaut...@Maths.UniNe.CH
Organization: University of Neuchatel, Switzerland
News-Moderator: Approval required for posting to comp.lang.asm.x86
Lines: 20
dai...@usa.net writes:
> That's the question:
> in your humble opinion, which is the best debugger
> you have seen?
> There are some features you must look:
> - Memory requirements
> - Features
> - CPU needed
> and another things.
> If U can, tell me your experience and if it runs in a 286
> (I own one, the one which i use every day).
For a 286, DR-DOS 7.02's debug.exe is not too bad
(it understands at least 286 intructions, has help, etc.)
URL: http://www.caldera.com/dos/html/choose.html
--
Gautier
Denis Tishchenko
dai...@usa.net wrote,
> That's the question:
> in your humble opinion, which is the best debugger
> you have seen?
> There are some features you must look:
> - Memory requirements
> - Features
> - CPU needed
> and another things.
Probably Turbo Debugger by Borland is the best. But, since
there is not such thing as Virtual Mode on 286, this debugger
takes too much conventional memory, and if you have to step
through a rather big program (>300KB) you will probably fail.
That is why when I had 286 (it was just 5 month ago) I prefered
AFD PRO (advanced full screen debugger), which is definetly
smaller than TD and has a lot of powerful features.
Both TD and AFD run on 286 and recognize its instructions.
Why don't you upgrade to 386? I think you could do it for a
bottle of beer :-)
--
Best wishes,
Denis
---------------- e-mail: pr...@denis.kiev.ua ----------------
David T. Leimbach
As far as I have used the Turbo Debugger by Borland has a nice interface. I
think it runs with a 286 processor and probably about a meg of ram.
It uses the same IDE interface as Turbo C++ and variables can be viewed as
well as breakpoints set and watches and basically anything I can think of that
I would want to do.
The only drawback is that it is a commercial product...
:)
Dave
Joel Corley
David T. Leimbach wrote:
------
Turbo Debugger is definately the best app debugger I've used.
It has the most features and most intuative interface. CodeView
sucks. I've used a few others. I currently use SoftICE/WinICE
for Win95/NT driver development. WinICE has certain features
that make it very useful for Windows driver development; but it
could use some work on the interface.
Joel Corley