Hey everyone, over the last week I wrote a GUI front-end to Ruby's bundled debugger using the Ruby/GTK2 bindings. I've always wanted just a simple GUI debugger and not a full blown IDE. It's the first release, so don't be suprised if there are many bugs. I encourage you to submit any you come across though, as well as suggestions. Website: http://mr-guid.rubyforge.org Project page: http://rubyforge.org/projects/mr-guid Mitchell's Ruby GUI Debugger (Mr. Guid) is a simple Ruby GUI debugger written in Ruby using Ruby/GTK2 bindings. It is only meant to be a debugger, not an editor or IDE. It has all the functionality of Ruby's bundled debugger.
on 2006-02-13 02:18
on 2006-02-13 15:10
On 2/12/06, mitchell <email@example.com> wrote: > written in Ruby using Ruby/GTK2 bindings. It is only meant to be a > debugger, not an editor or IDE. It has all the functionality of Ruby's > bundled debugger. > This looks very nice. I'll give it a shot, and let you know if it sets my PC on fire. Thanks for making this. I've never been able to get happy with running the debugger from gvim, and a stand-alone tool might be just what I needed.
on 2006-02-13 17:34
Hey that looks pretty neat, thanks for putting it up, .adam
on 2006-02-13 19:30
mitchell wrote: > Website: http://mr-guid.rubyforge.org > Project page: http://rubyforge.org/projects/mr-guid Great! I always missed a graphical debugger to go with my vim :) One question though: Is it able to work with a project consisting of multiple files?
on 2006-02-13 22:01
It sure is! Mr. Guid loads any new file immediately as it encounters it during execution (if it hasn't already been loaded), so when you are stepping into a require, load, etc., the new source file is shown and can be debugged. Currently there is no way to switch manually between files during execution, as they only switch when execution passes between files, but expect the next release to be able to do this.
on 2006-02-13 23:53
Looks like I might now have a debugger for my Nokia 770 (see prior post today) ;) Arachno would be a bit of an overkill, not that I don't love it on my desktop. Thx, Ken
on 2006-02-14 15:13
In message <firstname.lastname@example.org>, mitchell <email@example.com> writes >Hey everyone, over the last week I wrote a GUI front-end to Ruby's Nice. Not worried about the fact that GUID is an established acronym used in COM for about 15 years now? Just a thought, you may want to change the name to avoid search collisions. Stephen
on 2006-02-14 16:47
On Tuesday 14 February 2006 08:23 pm, Stephen Kellett wrote: > Like CS kiddies and people haven't been using conflicting names before? Reusing existing names is perfectly okay. Tsume
on 2006-02-14 21:19
DÅ?a Utorok 14 FebruÃ¡r 2006 12:23 Stephen Kellett napÃsal: > > Stephen Sooo... Are we going to not use the word "assembly" now because it's a .NET term? Or heck, invent a new word for "library" to make searches unambiguous? I'm not even going to start on how bloody impossible it is to search for the ".NET" buzzword. Searching for a single term without context makes no sense anyway. David Vallner
on 2006-02-14 21:56
Stephen Kellett wrote: > > Not worried about the fact that GUID is an established acronym used in > COM for about 15 years now? Just a thought, you may want to change the > name to avoid search collisions. > > Stephen No, I'm not worried. I don't think this is an issue because when people want to find a Ruby GUI Debugger, they will probably search for just that, not GUID.
on 2006-02-14 23:54
In message <firstname.lastname@example.org>, David Vallner <email@example.com> writes >Sooo... Are we going to not use the word "assembly" now because it's a .NET >term? Or heck, invent a new word for "library" to make searches unambiguous? No. Both of those terms were in use before .NET came along. >I'm not even going to start on how bloody impossible it is to search for the >".NET" buzzword. I'm surprised at the hostility to this suggestion. It was not a command. Stephen