Variable not Showing in Debugger

[Arcticool]

Can anyone tell me why j never shows up in my locals window? 32 is
printed to console so I know the assignment is working. I was under the
impression that I could see everything as it happens by setting a
breakpoint then F11 on through the code. Kind of disturbing that j never
shows up, (regardless of where I set my breakpoint) as it makes me
wonder what else I'm not seeing. Is there a 'show everything' debugger
option or something I'm missing? BTW, I'm using the 'Express' version of
Visual Studio.

public class Tester
{
* static int j = 32;
static void Main()
* {
Console.WriteLi ne(j);
Time t1 = new Time( currentTime );
t1.DisplayCurre ntTime();

Time t2 = new Time( 2007, 9, 18, 11, 45 );
t2.DisplayCurre ntTime();

Time t3 = new Time();
t3.DisplayCurre ntTime();
}
}

//* = breakpoints

Thanks in advance,

Jack

[Pavel Minaev]

Re: Variable not Showing in Debugger

On Aug 13, 12:04 pm, Arcticool <arctic...@hotm ail.comwrote:

Can anyone tell me why j never shows up in my locals window?
...
public class Tester
{
* static int j = 32;

Because it's not a local variable. Local variables are those declared
within a method, and "j" here is a static field. You can type
"Tester.j" in the Watch window to observe it.

[Peter Duniho]

Re: Variable not Showing in Debugger

On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 01:04:35 -0700, Arcticool <arcticool@hotm ail.com>
wrote:

Can anyone tell me why j never shows up in my locals window?

The static field j isn't a local variable.

32 is printed to console so I know the assignment is working. I was
under the impression that I could see everything as it happens by
setting a breakpoint then F11 on through the code. Kind of disturbing
that j never shows up,

You might try the "Autos" window. It will only show the static field j
when it's present in the previous and current line of code as you step
through in the debugger. But at least you'll see it then. :)

Pete

[=?Utf-8?B?U2ltb24gVGFtbWFu?=]

Re: Variable not Showing in Debugger

It's worth noting that in some scenarios some values won't ever appear in the
debugger, even in the watch window. I think it's either static readonly or
consts in certain scenarios.

"Peter Duniho" wrote:

On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 01:04:35 -0700, Arcticool <arcticool@hotm ail.com>
wrote:
>

Can anyone tell me why j never shows up in my locals window?

>
The static field j isn't a local variable.
>

32 is printed to console so I know the assignment is working. I was
under the impression that I could see everything as it happens by
setting a breakpoint then F11 on through the code. Kind of disturbing
that j never shows up,

>
You might try the "Autos" window. It will only show the static field j
when it's present in the previous and current line of code as you step
through in the debugger. But at least you'll see it then. :)
>
Pete
>

[Peter Duniho]

Re: Variable not Showing in Debugger

On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 08:25:01 -0700, Simon Tamman
<SimonTamman@di scussions.micro soft.comwrote:

It's worth noting that in some scenarios some values won't ever appear
in the
debugger, even in the watch window. I think it's either static readonly
or
consts in certain scenarios.

I don't have the complete enumeration. But I would say the general rule
is probably that a variable won't show up when it's not really a
variable. Certainly "const" would fall into that category, maybe "static
readonly", and also variables that have been optimized out in a Release
build. Maybe there are other examples too that I haven't thought of.

Pete

[Arcticool]

Re: Variable not Showing in Debugger

Peter Duniho wrote:

On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 08:25:01 -0700, Simon Tamman
<SimonTamman@di scussions.micro soft.comwrote:
>

>It's worth noting that in some scenarios some values won't ever appear
>in the
>debugger, even in the watch window. I think it's either static
>readonly or
>consts in certain scenarios.

>
I don't have the complete enumeration. But I would say the general rule
is probably that a variable won't show up when it's not really a
variable. Certainly "const" would fall into that category, maybe
"static readonly", and also variables that have been optimized out in a
Release build. Maybe there are other examples too that I haven't
thought of.
>
Pete

Hmm, I've looked everywhere that I can think of and I do not see an
'Autos' window. I have Error List, Output, Locals, and Watch. In another
pane I have Call Stack and Immediate. But no Autos.

Also, maybe I'm missing something but it sure seems lame that the
debugger won't show me what's going on automatically. After all isn't
that its job? Having to type Tester.j in the watch window does work, but
what if there are a ton of those, then I have to manually type them all
(?) Just seems like a glaring omission of functionality to me. Can
anyone think of a reason for this. I'm sure I must be missing something.

Jack

[Peter Duniho]

Re: Variable not Showing in Debugger

On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 13:08:50 -0700, Arcticool <arcticool@hotm ail.com>
wrote:

Hmm, I've looked everywhere that I can think of and I do not see an
'Autos' window. I have Error List, Output, Locals, and Watch. In another
pane I have Call Stack and Immediate. But no Autos.

I don't have an Express version installed on any of my computers right
now, but it would surprise me very much if that was one of the
"retail-only" features.

Are you sure you're looking at the "Debug/Window ->" menu when you're
actually debugging a project. The "Autos" window is only available then.

If all else fails, try typing Ctrl-D, followed immedately by A. That
should show the window.

Also, maybe I'm missing something but it sure seems lame that the
debugger won't show me what's going on automatically.

Your comment doesn't make any sense to me. The debugger has a variety of
ways for you to monitor data automatically, including the "Autos" window.

After all isn't that its job? Having to type Tester.j in the watch
window does work, but what if there are a ton of those, then I have to
manually type them all (?)

If you feel that at every program statement, you have so many different
variables that you need to keep an eye on it's actually problematic for
you to configure the debugger to show you those variables, you probably
have something wrong either with your program's design or your debugging
technique.

Pete

[Arcticool]

Re: Variable not Showing in Debugger

Peter Duniho wrote:

On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 13:08:50 -0700, Arcticool <arcticool@hotm ail.com>
wrote:
>

>Hmm, I've looked everywhere that I can think of and I do not see an
>'Autos' window. I have Error List, Output, Locals, and Watch. In
>another pane I have Call Stack and Immediate. But no Autos.

>
I don't have an Express version installed on any of my computers right
now, but it would surprise me very much if that was one of the
"retail-only" features.
>
Are you sure you're looking at the "Debug/Window ->" menu when you're
actually debugging a project. The "Autos" window is only available then.

Yep, the Debug/Window only has Output, Locals, Watch, Immediate, and
Call Stack, no Autos present.

If all else fails, try typing Ctrl-D, followed immedately by A. That
should show the window.

No go. Maybe this is where the 'Express' version falls short and you get
what you pay for...

>Also, maybe I'm missing something but it sure seems lame that the
>debugger won't show me what's going on automatically.

>
Your comment doesn't make any sense to me. The debugger has a variety
of ways for you to monitor data automatically, including the "Autos"
window.

Unless it doesn't :)

>After all isn't that its job? Having to type Tester.j in the watch
>window does work, but what if there are a ton of those, then I have to
>manually type them all (?)

>
If you feel that at every program statement, you have so many different
variables that you need to keep an eye on it's actually problematic for
you to configure the debugger to show you those variables, you probably
have something wrong either with your program's design or your debugging
technique.
>
Pete

I just thought that the debugger could show everything that's happening
in the code as you step through. If it is only selectively showing me
information, I wonder what else I'm *not* seeing. Now I'm also wondering
if 'Express' is as good of a learning tool as the other versions...

Jack

[viepia@nospam.com]

Re: Variable not Showing in Debugger

In my installation VS Team System 2008 3.5 SP1 the auto Window shortcut is Ctrl+Alt+V,A.
If Express can't show the call stack that would make it unusable for me.


On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 16:34:37 -0700, Arcticool <arcticool@hotm ail.comwrote:

>Peter Duniho wrote:

>On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 13:08:50 -0700, Arcticool <arcticool@hotm ail.com>
>wrote:
>>

>>Hmm, I've looked everywhere that I can think of and I do not see an
>>'Autos' window. I have Error List, Output, Locals, and Watch. In
>>another pane I have Call Stack and Immediate. But no Autos.

>>
>I don't have an Express version installed on any of my computers right
>now, but it would surprise me very much if that was one of the
>"retail-only" features.
>>
>Are you sure you're looking at the "Debug/Window ->" menu when you're
>actually debugging a project. The "Autos" window is only available then.

>
>Yep, the Debug/Window only has Output, Locals, Watch, Immediate, and
>Call Stack, no Autos present.
>

>If all else fails, try typing Ctrl-D, followed immedately by A. That
>should show the window.

>
>No go. Maybe this is where the 'Express' version falls short and you get
>what you pay for...
>

>>Also, maybe I'm missing something but it sure seems lame that the
>>debugger won't show me what's going on automatically.

>>
>Your comment doesn't make any sense to me. The debugger has a variety
>of ways for you to monitor data automatically, including the "Autos"
>window.

>
>Unless it doesn't :)
>

>>After all isn't that its job? Having to type Tester.j in the watch
>>window does work, but what if there are a ton of those, then I have to
>>manually type them all (?)

>>
>If you feel that at every program statement, you have so many different
>variables that you need to keep an eye on it's actually problematic for
>you to configure the debugger to show you those variables, you probably
>have something wrong either with your program's design or your debugging
>technique.
>>
>Pete

>
>I just thought that the debugger could show everything that's happening
>in the code as you step through. If it is only selectively showing me
>information, I wonder what else I'm *not* seeing. Now I'm also wondering
>if 'Express' is as good of a learning tool as the other versions...
>
>Jack

[Peter Duniho]

Re: Variable not Showing in Debugger

On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 16:34:37 -0700, Arcticool <arcticool@hotm ail.com>
wrote:

[...]
I just thought that the debugger could show everything that's happening
in the code as you step through. If it is only selectively showing me
information, I wonder what else I'm *not* seeing.

Well, one other obvious thing missing from Express is the lack of threaded
debugging. That is, you can debug any thread in Express, but it has no UI
for switching your view from one thread to another.

Express is a limited version of Visual Studio. It stands to reason that
there will be things it doesn't show you.

Now I'm also wondering if 'Express' is as good of a learning tool as the
other versions...

If the Express version had all of the features that the retail versions
had, there wouldn't be much point in the retail versions, would there?
And surely the determining factor for what features make it into the
Express version and what features don't is not strictly "which ones
support the IDE as a learning tool?" That is, obviously given that some
features are missing in the Express version, some of the missing features
would be ones that are useful for learning.

In other words, I have no idea why you would expect that the free version
of Visual Studio be every bit as effective a "learning tool" as the retail
version, at least with respect to your apparent implication that features
in the IDE equate to it being a "learning tool" (personally, I think that
one of the things that may help the Express version be a good learning
tool is the relative simplicity, leaving out features that could confuse a
beginning programmer).

Now, all that said...I'm still surprised that it doesn't have the "Autos"
window. I've used the Express version in the past, and that's the sort of
feature that I'd think I'd notice if it were missing. But I guess I'll
take your word for it that that's one of the features that's been left out
of the Express version (I definitely don't care enough to install the
thing now just to check :p ).

But surely this is not a critical feature for being able to use the
debugger as a "learning tool". It's really only a matter of slight
inconvenience. It's not like the debugger won't let you see whatever
variables you want to see. You just need to be a bit more explicit about
it.

Pete

[Arcticool]

Re: Variable not Showing in Debugger

Peter Duniho wrote:

On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 16:34:37 -0700, Arcticool <arcticool@hotm ail.com>
wrote:
>

>[...]
>I just thought that the debugger could show everything that's
>happening in the code as you step through. If it is only selectively
>showing me information, I wonder what else I'm *not* seeing.

>
Well, one other obvious thing missing from Express is the lack of
threaded debugging. That is, you can debug any thread in Express, but
it has no UI for switching your view from one thread to another.
>
Express is a limited version of Visual Studio. It stands to reason that
there will be things it doesn't show you.
>

>Now I'm also wondering if 'Express' is as good of a learning tool as
>the other versions...

>
If the Express version had all of the features that the retail versions
had, there wouldn't be much point in the retail versions, would there?
And surely the determining factor for what features make it into the
Express version and what features don't is not strictly "which ones
support the IDE as a learning tool?" That is, obviously given that some
features are missing in the Express version, some of the missing
features would be ones that are useful for learning.
>
In other words, I have no idea why you would expect that the free
version of Visual Studio be every bit as effective a "learning tool" as
the retail version, at least with respect to your apparent implication
that features in the IDE equate to it being a "learning tool"
(personally, I think that one of the things that may help the Express
version be a good learning tool is the relative simplicity, leaving out
features that could confuse a beginning programmer).
>
Now, all that said...I'm still surprised that it doesn't have the
"Autos" window. I've used the Express version in the past, and that's
the sort of feature that I'd think I'd notice if it were missing. But I
guess I'll take your word for it that that's one of the features that's
been left out of the Express version (I definitely don't care enough to
install the thing now just to check :p ).
>
But surely this is not a critical feature for being able to use the
debugger as a "learning tool". It's really only a matter of slight
inconvenience. It's not like the debugger won't let you see whatever
variables you want to see. You just need to be a bit more explicit
about it.
>
Pete

Well free is free so I guess I can't complain, just a little surprised
this feature is missing. Apparently there is quite a bit more missing as
well:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vstudio/products/cc149003.aspx

http://www.programmingforums.org/post146811.html

It looks like the 2005 Express was missing the Watch window, but had
Autos, now in the 2008 edition its reversed.
Anyway, the good news is that items added to the Watch window are saved
with the project. If I close VS then re-open the Watched items
previously added are still there.

Jack

[Pavel Minaev]

Re: Variable not Showing in Debugger

On Aug 14, 3:34 am, Arcticool <arctic...@hotm ail.comwrote:

I just thought that the debugger could show everything that's happening
in the code as you step through.

For one thing, the code sample you've posted doesn't even use the
variable you're interested in, so why should the debugger bother
showing it? I doubt it would be displayed even if you could enable the
"Autos" window. If you at least had an instance of your class, and
called a method on it, then "this" would've show in "Locals", and you
could expand it and see the static variables in a separate node
under it.

And, of course, the debugger cannot just show you all values of all
static variables in a program at all times - for anything above
HelloWorld, it would quickly become unwieldy.

[Arcticool]

Re: Variable not Showing in Debugger

Pavel Minaev wrote:

On Aug 14, 3:34 am, Arcticool <arctic...@hotm ail.comwrote:

>I just thought that the debugger could show everything that's happening
>in the code as you step through.

>
For one thing, the code sample you've posted doesn't even use the
variable you're interested in, so why should the debugger bother
showing it? I doubt it would be displayed even if you could enable the
"Autos" window. If you at least had an instance of your class, and
called a method on it, then "this" would've show in "Locals", and you
could expand it and see the static variables in a separate node
under it.

When you say the variable J is not 'used' you mean the variable isn't
modified? J is assigned to 32. Also it is used on Console.Writeli ne(J);
So 'stuff' is happening with J, but not much I guess...

And, of course, the debugger cannot just show you all values of all
static variables in a program at all times - for anything above
HelloWorld, it would quickly become unwieldy.

I don't really want to see everything at once, just what is happening as
it happens. If something changes ( J gets assigned to 32 or J is written
out ) I'd like the debugger to show me what's happening as I hit F11.

But I think the real issue is that I'm using the Express version of VS
which has no Autos window, which would have shown me these things. I've
done a bit of searching however and haven't seen anything better than VS
Express (not Windows based anyway) so I'm wondering now if I would be
better off with an older (full retail) of VS 2003? With the patches and
updates will I be better off or worse?
Thanks,

Jack