|Need info on incremental compilers. email@example.com (1995-07-31)|
|Re: Need info on incremental compilers. Steve_Kilbane@cegelecproj.co.uk (1995-08-04)|
|Re: Need info on incremental compilers. firstname.lastname@example.org (1995-08-14)|
|Re: Need info on incremental compilers. email@example.com (1995-12-28)|
|Re: Need info on incremental compilers. firstname.lastname@example.org (Stefan Monnier) (1995-12-30)|
|Re: Need info on incremental compilers. email@example.com (1996-01-12)|
|From:||firstname.lastname@example.org (Bill Leonard)|
|Organization:||Harris Computer Systems, Ft. Lauderdale FL|
|Date:||Mon, 14 Aug 1995 22:34:40 GMT|
email@example.com (Mark Marchukov) writes:
> 1) Are there faster alternatives to the classic edit--compile--link--run
> procedure other than incremental compilation and interpreters?
The Harris NightView debugger provides something called a "patchpoint"
which allows you to "patch in" an arbitrary expression or assignment,
including function calls, while you are debugging. This allows you to fix
simple problems, like leaving out an initialization, without recompiling or
relinking. Once you make the patch, the new code is executed without
debugger intervention, so there is really no performance penalty.
We also have plans to allow you to load in a new version of a compilation
unit, so if you have a more complicated problem to fix, all you have to do
is recompile (no relinking) and load the new object module into the
debugged program. This feature is not yet implemented, but we see no
technical obstacles (just not enough time to do everything at once :-).
Harris Computer Systems Corporation
2101 W. Cypress Creek Road
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.