[dap] support non-verified breakpoints #1374
Conversation
…able in the debugged node
TheGeorge
force-pushed
the
non_verifired_bp
branch
from
ceb93c1
to
fdc8ecb
Compare
| @@ -1084,3 +1091,25 @@ distribution_error(Error) -> | |||
| io_lib:format("Could not start Erlang distribution. ~p", [Error]) | |||
| ) | |||
| ). | |||
|
|
|||
| -spec maybe_interprete_and_clear_module(node(), module()) -> {boolean(), binary()}. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit: interprete -> interpret
| true -> | ||
| {module, Module} = els_dap_rpc:i(ProjectNode, Module), | ||
|
|
||
| %% purge all breakpoints from the module |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why do we want to purge them?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's just easier to code this way. The DAP protocol gives the following information on changes to breakpoints:
- complete set of line breakpoints per module
- complete set of function breakpoints in total
So we delete all breakpoints and set them again.
We should probably calculate a delta and then use delete_break and del_break_in. This PR doesn't change the general way we set breakpoints, just makes sure we don't crash on invalid ones.
| LineBreakPoints | ||
| ), | ||
| do_line_breakpoints(Node, Module, LineBreakPoints, Breaks, Set) -> | ||
| case Set of |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In which case do we get Set=false?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When the module does not exist, e.g. the debugged node cannot load the module.
| do_function_breaks(Node, Module, FBreaks, Breaks) -> | ||
| [els_dap_rpc:break_in(Node, Module, Func, Arity) || {Func, Arity} <- FBreaks], | ||
| do_function_breaks(Node, Module, FBreaks, Breaks, Set) -> | ||
| [[els_dap_rpc:break_in(Node, Module, Func, Arity) || {Func, Arity} <- FBreaks] || Set], |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we please use a regular statement (or a function) instead of the double list comprehension? :)
| BreakpointsRsps = [ | ||
| #{<<"verified">> => true, <<"line">> => Line} | ||
| || {{_, Line}, _} <- els_dap_rpc:all_breaks(ProjectNode, Module) | ||
| #{<<"verified">> => IsModuleAvailable, <<"line">> => Line, message => Message} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should message be a binary?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, message should be a binary.
Description
support non-verified breakpoints in case the module isn't available in the debugged node
Before this would crash, now create a non-verified breakpoint, with some description
Fixes #1373