line numbers policy change for "multiline" expressions

[Howard Lovatt]

Unfortunately lazy evaluation and FLUENT, e.g. Streams, and the current
debugger do not go well together. The problem is that you need to be able
to observe the transformations as they happen down the chain of calls.
Therefore I doubt it is worth changing the line numbers, better to put
effort into a new debugging tool that works well with lazy, FLUENT APIs.

 -- Howard.


On 28 January 2014 09:27, Remi Forax <forax at univ-mlv.fr> wrote:

> On 01/27/2014 04:05 PM, Jochen Theodorou wrote:
> > Am 27.01.2014 15:16, schrieb Remi Forax:
> >> Hi Anna,
> >> this change is unlikely be reverted, otherwise for a code like the one
> >> below,
> >> the lambda body will not have the right line number.
> >>
> >> list.stream()
> >>        .filter(....)
> >>        .map(x -> Integer.toString(x))
> >>        .collect(...);
> >
> > I wished there would be some kind of spec for how the bytecode has to
> > look like for the debugger to be able to have breakpoints and step
> > debugging. At least the conditions for the former seems to differ from
> > the later.
>
> + 1
>
> >
> > bye Jochen
> >
>
> Rémi
>
>
>


-- 
  -- Howard.