[Pharo-project] Fwd: Meeting Aliens (callbacks) in the debugger - was this risky?

Schwab,Wilhelm K bschwab at anest.ufl.edu
Wed Mar 21 14:39:32 EDT 2012


Sig,

Great news!  I'm fixing some nomenclature, after which it will be time to release the dogs on callbacks.  It would be great to get me to a point of understanding them and being able to put (curve fit) function definitions back into the image.

Thanks!

Bill



________________________________________
From: pharo-project-bounces at lists.gforge.inria.fr [pharo-project-bounces at lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of Igor Stasenko [siguctua at gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2012 12:19 PM
To: Pharo-project at lists.gforge.inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Fwd: Meeting Aliens (callbacks) in the debugger - was this risky?

On 21 March 2012 07:40, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse at inria.fr> wrote:
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: "Schwab,Wilhelm K" <bschwab at anest.ufl.edu>
> Subject: FW: Meeting Aliens (callbacks) in the debugger - was this risky?
> Date: March 21, 2012 1:57:16 AM GMT+01:00
> To: "stephane.ducasse at inria.fr" <stephane.ducasse at inria.fr>
>
> Stef,
>
> I am currently unable to post to the list  (Outlook is being a pain) - could
> you forward this for me?  I'm curious if I'm living dangerously or simply
> basking in Smalltalk's wonderful features.
>
> Bill
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Schwab,Wilhelm K
> Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2012 8:55 PM
> To: pharo-project at lists.gforge.inria.fr
> Subject: Meeting Aliens (callbacks) in the debugger - was this risky?
>
> To see whether one can expect to set breakpoints in callback blocks, I gave
> it shot in #exampleCqsort:
>
>     cb := Callback
>             signature:  'int (*)(const void *, const void *)'
>             block: [ :arg1 :arg2 |
>                 self halt.
>                 ((arg1 doubleAt: 1) - (arg2 doubleAt: 1)) sign
>             ].
>
> I then ran the example.  To my pleasant surprise/amazement, a walkback
> appeared and the debugger was functional; I was able to evaluate the
> accessors and get numbers.  Is this dangerous in some way, or does it "just
> work?"  It would be hugely helpful if it is safe.
>
> Bill
>

Should be fine.
Unless you abandon the process :) But there should be a measures
preventing you from doing that.


--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.





More information about the Pharo-dev mailing list