Skip to main content

debugging - Why does the debugger not stop when a message is generated?


I am on version 10.1. I have enabled the debugger and I have checked the box in front of "Break at Messages" in the Debugger Tools Window. However most the time the debugger does not stop when a message is generated.


Example



Let us create the following function for testing. Because this definition contains a message and the debugger behaves strangely when you use it to define a message, let us define it with the debugger disabled.


debugTest::testMsg = "stop it!";
debugTest[] :=
(
global = 0;
While[
True,
global++;
1[[1]];
Message[debugTest::testMsg]

]
)

Now with the debugger enabled, as well as the option to break at messages, when I evaluate the following


Dynamic@global
debugTest[]

the counter global just keeps running. It stops for none of the messages that are generated.


An example where it kind of works is this


(Message[debugTest3::testMsg]; global = 0;)


However, after the debugger stops, I am unable to prevent that global=0 is evaluated.


Considerations


The behaviour is somewhat similar in Mathematica 9.0.1. There, the debugger does actually stop evaluation when the message is generated in the for loop and the most essential part of the functionality works. However, the Abort button does not seem to really abort evaluation.


I also had some trouble with getting the debugger to stop at breakpoints in this version in some specific scenarios. I realise the debugger can be a bit tricky to use and many people don't take it seriously, but for me it had quite some value.


Question: Why does the debugger not stop when a message is generated, is this a bug?



See also: Does anyone have a debugger that works in version 10.+?




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - Plot 4D data with color as 4th dimension

I have a list of 4D data (x position, y position, amplitude, wavelength). I want to plot x, y, and amplitude on a 3D plot and have the color of the points correspond to the wavelength. I have seen many examples using functions to define color but my wavelength cannot be expressed by an analytic function. Is there a simple way to do this? Answer Here a another possible way to visualize 4D data: data = Flatten[Table[{x, y, x^2 + y^2, Sin[x - y]}, {x, -Pi, Pi,Pi/10}, {y,-Pi,Pi, Pi/10}], 1]; You can use the function Point along with VertexColors . Now the points are places using the first three elements and the color is determined by the fourth. In this case I used Hue, but you can use whatever you prefer. Graphics3D[ Point[data[[All, 1 ;; 3]], VertexColors -> Hue /@ data[[All, 4]]], Axes -> True, BoxRatios -> {1, 1, 1/GoldenRatio}]

plotting - Filling between two spheres in SphericalPlot3D

Manipulate[ SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, Mesh -> None, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], {n, 0, 1}] I cant' seem to be able to make a filling between two spheres. I've already tried the obvious Filling -> {1 -> {2}} but Mathematica doesn't seem to like that option. Is there any easy way around this or ... Answer There is no built-in filling in SphericalPlot3D . One option is to use ParametricPlot3D to draw the surfaces between the two shells: Manipulate[ Show[SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], ParametricPlot3D[{ r {Sin[t] Cos[1.5 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[1.5 Pi], Cos[t]}, r {Sin[t] Cos[0 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[0 Pi], Cos[t]}}, {r, 1, 2 - n}, {t, 0, Pi}, PlotStyle -> Yellow, Mesh -> {2, 15}]], {n, 0, 1}]

plotting - Mathematica: 3D plot based on combined 2D graphs

I have several sigmoidal fits to 3 different datasets, with mean fit predictions plus the 95% confidence limits (not symmetrical around the mean) and the actual data. I would now like to show these different 2D plots projected in 3D as in but then using proper perspective. In the link here they give some solutions to combine the plots using isometric perspective, but I would like to use proper 3 point perspective. Any thoughts? Also any way to show the mean points per time point for each series plus or minus the standard error on the mean would be cool too, either using points+vertical bars, or using spheres plus tubes. Below are some test data and the fit function I am using. Note that I am working on a logit(proportion) scale and that the final vertical scale is Log10(percentage). (* some test data *) data = Table[Null, {i, 4}]; data[[1]] = {{1, -5.8}, {2, -5.4}, {3, -0.8}, {4, -0.2}, {5, 4.6}, {1, -6.4}, {2, -5.6}, {3, -0.7}, {4, 0.04}, {5, 1.0}, {1, -6.8}, {2, -4.7}, {3, -1....