[racket-dev] stepper UI question

That seems like the wrong point of integration.  If I have

  (define v <complex expr>)

  (check-expect (g v) h)

then simply stepping into (g v) may not at all be enough.  If the
stepper forced people to rewrite their programs just for steppability,
that should be considered a bad design.

Shriram

On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 8:27 PM, Robby Findler
<robby at eecs.northwestern.edu> wrote:
> It seems to me it would be nice to contemplate a design that
> integrates test suites and the stepper (also in light of Mike's
> signatures).
>
> Robby
>
> On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 7:23 PM, Shriram Krishnamurthi <sk at cs.brown.edu> wrote:
>> I know Guillaume proposed to do it in the context of the editor.  I'm
>> unconvinced that that's the right way to go.  At any rate, integrating
>> into an existing bit of infrastructure (def'ns or inter's) is going to
>> be much more complex than an "off-line" prototype that people can
>> critique.  So we should do that regardless.
>>
>> You and Kathy raise good and interesting points.  This tells me that
>> there is not yet a good answer to *where* the stepper should run.  I
>> believe this is quite separable from *how* the stepper runs, ie, how
>> it displays the sequence of expressions.  Since I feel that is
>> currently the biggest problem with it, it seems wise that we focus on
>> the latter for now.  Once we make some real progress on that
>> high-order bit, we can see what percolates up.
>>
>> Do others agree that this is the high-order bit?  If not (and perhaps
>> even if so), can you articulate why?
>>
>> Shriram
>> _________________________________________________
>>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>>  http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
>>
>