🚀 go-pugleaf

> jem@vuse.vanderbilt.edu (John Eric Meyer) writes:
>> I recently received an advertisement for the MultiScope Debugger v2.0 [...]

baker@westsd.dco.dec.com (Art Baker) writes:
>  In short, I feel rather like I just paid $99 to be one of their
> beta-testers.  While I think that this tool has a lot of potential, I
> didn't get the impression that it was a very well-polished program.

In a previous lifetime :) I was using Logitech Modula-2 to write a schedu-
ling application.  We were running out of memory for debugging on DOS, so
I switched to OS/2 with the new MultiScope debugger (first 1.0 then 1.1).

Innovative.  Garish.  Inconsistent.  Buggy.  Unstable.  In the end, I
switched back to doing printf's on DOS because MultiScope was crashing
way more often than my application -- and to me, that's unacceptable for
a debugger.

It's unfortunate to hear that they still haven't found a clue.

[ \tom haapanen    "i don't even know what street canada is on" -- al capone ]
[ tomh@wes.on.ca                   "trust the programmer" -- ansi c standard ]
[ waterloo engineering software      "to thine own self be true" -- polonius ]