-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Several debugger improvements #20
Conversation
desktop/src/args.rs
Outdated
parse(try_from_str = "parse_breakpoint"), | ||
requires = "debug", | ||
help = "Breakpoint that is added to the debugger at the very beginning. Breakpoints are \ | ||
specified in hexadecimal.", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
hexadecimal
An example for the exact format would be great! (e.g. 0x42
or 0x0042
or 42h
or $42
, etc.)
long = "--breakpoints", | ||
parse(try_from_str = "parse_breakpoint"), | ||
requires = "debug", | ||
help = "Breakpoint that is added to the debugger at the very beginning. Breakpoints are \ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It is not clear, if the user can pass one or many breakpoints (and if many, how they have to be separated (e.g. 0x42, 0x21
or 0x42;0x21
or 0x42 0x21
etc.)).
desktop/src/args.rs
Outdated
fn parse_breakpoint(src: &str) -> Result<Word, String> { | ||
u16::from_str_radix(src, 16) | ||
.map(Word::new) | ||
.map_err(|e| format!("failed to parse breakpoint: {}", e)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is the --help
message triggered here? If not, information about the proper format would be helpful.
9c9005c
to
dc59c5e
Compare
Wait with this merge for #21. |
dc59c5e
to
b256fe8
Compare
CC #18
See commit messages. Regarding review: again, debugger code isn't that beautiful. And it's not that critical, so I'd say a proper review is not necessary.