One feature I really appreciate in PyCharm is the evaluate expression window, where I can evaluate an expression and a block of code at breakpoint. I am wondering whether there is an equivalent / similar feature in Xcode for IOS development.
I have tried the following which does not give me what I need:
using "print" command in the debug console
using PO command to print object in debug console.
inserted "expression" in debug console.
Insert break point before and after the block of code which I want to evaluate
What I really need if possible is:
To be able to evaluate a block of code (after which, the value of the variables will be updated in the "variable watch window".
Change the expression / block of code to be evaluated at run time.
Once at break point, evaluate a block of code after the break point multiple times, without running the code before the break point again (this is the issue with inserting two breakpoints before and after the block of code, because I need to re-run the code before the first break point if I want to change my expression / block of code)
Related
I use Xcode7 to debug a App.
Seems step into behave like the step over, can't jump into the execution of a sub procedure? It's just jump to the next line in the source code each time.
And if I'm debug in the UIKit method(I don't have source code), it's jump to the next instruction.
As you have found, step-in avoids frames with no debug information. Most people like to just hit one step command, rather than switching between step & next depending on the line they are on, and in my experience, tend to choose step. This is made more pleasant if the debugger doesn't stop in printf & other code you have no debug info for.
However, lldb's "step" command has an option to control this:
-a <boolean> ( --step-in-avoids-no-debug <boolean> )
A boolean value that sets whether stepping into functions will step over functions with no debug information.
If you use this frequently, you can either reset the step alias to include this option, or make another alias that includes it. Use the command alias command to do this.
And if you always want step-in to step into code with no debug information, just set the global setting:
settings set target.process.thread.step-in-avoid-nodebug 0
either at the start of a debug session or in your .lldbinit.
Note, most of lldb's commands are documented in the help system. For instance, help step would have shown the above option for the step command, and apropos step would have shown the setting.
From GDB Manual:
Also, the step command only enters a function if there is line number information for the function. Otherwise it acts like the next command. This avoids problems when using cc -gl on MIPS machines. Previously, step entered subroutines if there was any debugging information about the routine.
And I found Step into works well when I have source file.
So maybe I have make a mistake. But the lldb is very lack of documents.
How do you trace all the methods invoked across different files in a particular user flow ?
Putting breakpoints at different points and observing the backtrace does not seem like the most efficient way.
Instead I would like to -
1) Put a breakpoint across all methods in the interested project.
2) Make all the breakpoints run a debugger command which prints out the file name and method name.
3) Edit the breakpoints such that the program continues to execute after a breakpoint is hit. (This option is available when you edit a particular
breakpoint.) So we don't stop at any breakpoint.
4) Disable all the breakpoints until I reach the flow I need to work on.
5) Enable all the breakpoints right before starting the flow.
With this approach, we don't have to manually put breakpoints at different places to understand the execution flow. Once the flow is complete, I can just look at the debugger console and figure out the execution flow.
Now, the question -
How can we do this using lldb commands?
Would appreciate any input/suggestions.
You can't do this with the Xcode breakpoint interface, but in the lldb console you can do:
(lldb) break set -r . -s AppName
Breakpoint 1: 478 locations.
(lldb) br com add
Enter your debugger command(s). Type 'DONE' to end.
> bt
> continue
> DONE
(lldb)
That sets a "symbol name match regular expression breakpoint" on all names ("." matches everything) in the binary/shared library called AppName. If you leave off the -s option, it will match all symbols everywhere. That will work but quite slowly...
The command prints a backtrace and continues.
This makes just ONE breakpoint, so you can do:
(lldb) break disable 1
Till you need it, and then enable it with:
(lldb) break enable 1
If you only want to catch some methods, you can adjust the regular expression, and if you find you aren't interested in some of the places you are hitting, you can individually disable locations within the breakpoint you've made this way.
(lldb) break list 1
Will show you all the locations, and:
(lldb) break disable 1.2-1.10 1.15
etc. will disable the locations.
This might get a little slow, because your app will be starting & stopping all the time. But it will do what you are asking.
You can put breakpoints on all methods in different files, and to trace how execution happens within that method click on Stepover.
Step over - shortcut - f6, it stops execution at next loc.
Also alternatively you can check value of particular variable or array by typing "po VariableName" in output window.
you can add related methods name through adding the symbol exception breakpoints.
I finished writing a class' .h and .m files in objective c in XCode and want to see if all the class functions are implemented correctly. I have not set up anything in the storyboard file yet but would like to test and debug the code. I'm looking to simply declare an object of the class type and to run some of the functions on it similar to using the command line with Python.
If there's no way to simply debug code using command line commands, what would be the easiest way to set up the storyboard?
You can use the XCTest to test your classes.
You can find all the information you need in the Apple documentation is actually pretty easy to use.
https://developer.apple.com/Library/ios/documentation/DeveloperTools/Conceptual/testing_with_xcode/testing_2_testing_basics/testing_2_testing_basics.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40014132-CH3-SW1
If you want you can check this tutorial as well.
http://rshankar.com/test-driven-development-in-ios-beginners-tutorial-part-1/
If you want you can set break points as well and check that your code is executing properly. Sometimes when I just want to proof-test small classes I do it just setting a couple of break points instead of the XCTest classes but it all depends on your study case. If you have a decent amount of classes I would suggest to use XCTest to check that the classes are actually doing what is expected setting your assertions and the other conditions that XCTest offers as a framework.
Another way you can do your testing if applicable is using NSLog to print in console lines or values of interest at each stage of your code execution.
You mentioned the command line. If you set breakpoints you can use po objName to print the value or print varName to check values of objects and primitive variables correspondingly. po stands for print object and print well... There's different options if you feel comfortable using the console just set NSLogs at certain point of your code or set the break points and print the values using po or print commands in the console.
Here you can check the string format specifiers for NSLog which are the same ones used for NSString
https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/cocoa/conceptual/Strings/Articles/formatSpecifiers.html
So every other IDE I have ever used, if there is some statement in the code with a break point set, there is a way to evaluate that statement to see what it is returning, ie immediate windows in visual studio, or using watch menu. Is there anything somewhat equivalent in XCode, or some way to evaluate a statement within a section of code?
ex:
if (CGRectContainsPoint([FGO BoundingBox], touchLocation))
Is returning false, so I'd like to see what [FGO BoundingBox] is evaluating to, but I can't seem to figure anything out short of changing the code to store it in an intermediate variable. Assuming I have a break point on this line in XCode what is the easiest way to see what this statement will return?
You can try:
po [FGO BoundingBox]
or
po NSStringFromCGRect([FGO BoundingBox])
also check out
help expression
in the debugger.
Break on that line, then step in to the "BoundingBox" function and step to the end of it (or where it returns something) and you should see what it's returning.
When I'm debugging something that goes wrong inside a loop, say on the 600th iteration, it can be a pain to have to break for every one. So I tried setting a conditional breakpoint, to only break if I = 600. That works, but now it takes almost a full minute to reach that point, where before it was almost instantaneous. What's going on, and is there any way to fix it?
When you hit a breakpoint, Windows stops the process and notifies the debugger. It has to switch contexts, evaluate the condition, decide that no, you don't want to be notified about it, restart the process and switch back. That can take a lot of processor cycles. If you're doing it in a tight loop, it'll take a couple orders of magnitude more processor cycles than one iteration of the loop takes.
If you're willing to mess with your code a little, there's a way to do conditional breakpoints without incurring all this overhead.
if <condition here> then
asm int 3 end;
This is a simple assembly instruction that manually sends a breakpoint notification to the OS. Now you can evaluate your condition inside the program, without switching contexts. Just make sure to take it out again when you're done with it. If an int 3 goes off inside a program that's not connected to a debugger, it'll raise an exception.
It slows it down because every time you reach that point, it has to check your condition.
What I tend to do is to temporarily create another variable like this (in C but should be doable in Delphi).
int xyzzynum = 600;
while (true) {
doSomething();
if (--xyzzynum == 0)
xyzzynum = xyzzynum;
}
then I put a non-conditional breakpoint on the "xyzzynum = xyzzynum;" line.
The program runs at full speed until it's been through the loop 600 times, because the debugger is just doing a normal breakpoint interrupt rather than checking conditions every time.
You can make the condition as complicated as you want.
Further to Mason's answer, you could make the int 3 assember only be compiled in if the program is built with the debug conditional defined:
{$ifdef debug}
{$message warn 'debug breakpoint present in code'}
if <condition here> then
asm int 3 end;
{$endif}
So, when you are debugging in the ide, you have the debug conditional in the project options. When you build the final product for your customers (with your build script?), you wouldn't include that symbol, so it wont get compiled in.
I also included the $message compiler directive, so you will see a warning when you compile letting you know that the code is still there. If you do that everywhere you use int 3, you will then have a nice list of places which you can double click on to take you straight to the offending code.
N#
Mason's explanations are quite good.
His code could be made a bit more secure by testing that you run under the debugger:
if (DebugHook <> 0) and <your specific condition here> then
asm int 3 end;
This will not do anything when the application is running normally and will stop if it's running under the debugger (whether launched from the IDE or attached to the debugger).
And with boolean shortcut <your specific condition here> won't even be evaluated if you're not under the debugger.
Conditional breakpoints in any debugger (I'm just surmising here) require the process to flip back and forth every time between your program and the debugger every time the breakpoint is hit. This process is time consuming but I do not think there is anything you can do.
Normally condition breakpoints work by inserting the appropriate break instruction into the code and then checking for the conditions you have specified. It'll check at every iteration and it might well be that the way in which the check is implemented is responsible for the delay as it's unlikely that the debugger compiles and inserts the complete check and breakpoint code into the existing code.
A way that you might be able to accelerate this is if you put the condition followed by an op with no side effect into the code directly and break on that op. Just remember to remove the condition and the op when you're done.