Previously:
Icecream: Never use print() to debug again in Python
91–100 of 271 posts
Re: Icecream: Never use print() to debug again in Python
#92This here is excellent:
print(f"{d['key'][1]=}")
d['key'][1]='one'
I recently started to learn (Common )Lisp. I realize how easy it would be to write a macro in Lisp that would implement the functionality of `Iceacream`, in a few lines of code.
Re: Icecream: Never use print() to debug again in Python
#93This is a really nice tool. But the fundamental reason most go for print is because its right there and that wins over other UX improvements or machinery. Python is a language where you can get a reasonably good debugger with a single line almost anywhere, still people reach for print()
Re: Icecream: Never use print() to debug again in Python
#94Instead of introducing a new library, why not just instruct your editor to do the heavy lifting for you? For instance, I've written a small Emacs function that asks for the argument to print in the Minibuffer and then inserts it once quoted, once unquoted. It's quite nice to have such a function for any programming language you use and bind it to the same keyboard short-cut.
For one, people not using emacs, or whatever editor it would be, can use it.
Sure, but why would anyone not use Emacs?!
Re: Icecream: Never use print() to debug again in Python
#95I promise the 15 minutes it takes to learn to use the debugger will save years of your life
Not necessarily. I know very well how to use a debugger, but nowadays I just prefer to use prints: it forces to you actually think about what's happening instead of just looking at it. It's also more useful in situations where putting a debugger actually changes behavior (high performance systems, parallel programs).
I would expect print-debugging to change the behavior in such cases too.
Usually writing to stdout is behind some synchronization so using print debugging will drop performance and make program less parallel.
Re: Icecream: Never use print() to debug again in Python
#96Instead of introducing a new library, why not just instruct your editor to do the heavy lifting for you? For instance, I've written a small Emacs function that asks for the argument to print in the Minibuffer and then inserts it once quoted, once unquoted. It's quite nice to have such a function for any programming language you use and bind it to the same keyboard short-cut.
For one, people not using emacs, or whatever editor it would be, can use it.
Then instruct whatever is your favorite editor likewise.
Re: Icecream: Never use print() to debug again in Python
#97I am always going to use print to debug in every programming language I can until the day I die.
The old style printf from C is still the best formatting tool for output/debugging. The C++ style was just a distraction without introducing anything of real value. log4xyz has some nice features in terms of enabling/disabling at runtime, through a config, but ultimately, printf rules.
The value introduced by C++ was type safety. In C, it's way too easy for the format string to get out of sync with the type of the arguments, e.g.:
printf("%d", my_long_var);
These days compilers have diagnostics to catch those errors, but if you rely on those you can't use dynamic format strings, which means you're effectively using a subset of C with a stronger type checker than C. That's a pretty good state but it's definitely not "old style printf()"; old style printf() was insecure.
And don't get me started on the convoluted macro invocations necessary to correctly convert int32_t, int64_t, size_t and ptrdiff_t. And that's with the newest standard: IIRC there was no standard way to print long long in C, at the time when C++ already supported it.
Re: Icecream: Never use print() to debug again in Python
#98I am looking at the examples (and the comments here about f-strings), but neither fit my own usage of debugging with print. When I use print, it is mostly for two reasons. To see the structure of a dict (often with multiple layers of dicts inside), or to get dir(x) to see what methods and attributes of a library object, since the documentation is not always so forthcoming.
Re: Icecream: Never use print() to debug again in Python
#99A while back I made a list of the Python debugging tools: https://stribny.name/blog/2019/06/debugging-python-programs/
Re: Icecream: Never use print() to debug again in Python
#100wait isnt that just enforcing bad practice? doesnt python have proper debuggers with breakpoints ect? why in hell should i use a lib to print stuff just for debugging? i mean why not having a proper logging lib and pipe some statements to [debug] or whatever i dont get it.