[Chicken-hackers] Re: [Chicken-users] single-stepping

[Derrell Piper]

Greetings,

I originally posted a query on chicken-users but I think this is probably 
better discussed here.

Seeing that 4.3.0 is out without ,step, may I ask what motivated the removal of 
single-stepping?  Looking at the diffs, I see it was tied to APPLYHOOK and 
that's gone too, so I assume that's somehow the motivation, but going from 
having single-stepping (no matter how lame) to not having it at all is, um, not 
progress.  It is after all one of the selling points on the 
call-with-current-continuation.org home page:

        "Execution profiling, debugging, backtrace and single-stepping support"

...which someone should at least fix.  The main page also needs to be updated 
to reflect the move from svn to git.  (I've asked for a Trac account...)

Don't get me wrong.  I very much enjoy using Chicken and I'd like to thank 
everyone who's taken over since felix asked for help and especially everyone 
who's  ported eggs.  (Now if we could just have something like 3's docindex 
back, pretty please?  I really miss having locally accessible egg docs...)

Thanks,

Derrell

On Dec 11, 2009, at 11:18 AM, Kon Lovett wrote:

>> 
>> The wiki and the manual both talk about ,step and a (singlestep...) form but 
>> these don't seem to be present in the 4.2.13 bits I'm building out of git.  
>> Is there a new and improved way to step through code?
> 
> See the "trace" egg for breakpoints.