[HN Gopher] Show HN: BugStalker - a modern Rust debugger
___________________________________________________________________
Show HN: BugStalker - a modern Rust debugger
Author : godzie
Score : 102 points
Date : 2025-04-25 13:58 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (github.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
| godzie wrote:
| BS is a modern debugger for Linux x86-64. Written in Rust for
| Rust programs.
|
| Async Rust support - debug async code with new commands: - async
| backtrace - inspect async task backtraces - async task - view
| task details - async stepover / async stepout - better control
| over async execution
|
| Enhanced variable inspection: - argd / vard - print variables and
| arguments using Debug trait
|
| Other: - new `call` Command - execute functions directly in the
| debugged program - `trigger` Command - fine-grained control over
| breakpoints - new project Website - better docs and resources
|
| ...and much more!
|
| Full Changelog:
| https://github.com/godzie44/BugStalker/releases/tag/v0.3.0
|
| Documentation & Demos: https://godzie44.github.io/BugStalker/
| bfrog wrote:
| Been hoping someone would make this, looks great!
|
| I guess I'm next hoping someone gets it working using jtag/swd
| debug probes for embedded targets :)
| goku12 wrote:
| Would something like this work for you? https://probe.rs/
| otherayden wrote:
| Best of luck with this project. I'm not even a rust dev but I
| came to say that I love this name
| sixthDot wrote:
| any Machine Interface planned (a la GDB/MI)?
| godzie wrote:
| First priority is a DAP support. But after this - why not.
| giancarlostoro wrote:
| BugStomper would have also been a great name choice. ;)
| rob74 wrote:
| Better than the current one - first, stalking is not really a
| verb that comes to mind when I think about bugs, and second, it
| has pretty negative connotations...
| meisel wrote:
| I'm surprised this isn't getting more love. My experience with
| other debuggers with Rust was quite poor, I hope this one can
| fare much better. For example, I couldn't call functions with
| previous debuggers
| bobajeff wrote:
| Does this have a machine interface mode like gdb/lldb? Asking
| because I like my debuggers to be integrated with my code editor
| of choice which is usually done via such an interface.
| godzie wrote:
| Unfortunately no, but it's a good idea. I'll definitely look
| into this feature.
| gitroom wrote:
| Honestly this wouldve helped me a ton when I got stuck with async
| errors before, Rust debugging always felt tougher than it should
| be.
| dathinab wrote:
| yeah I mean you are basically stuck with a few options
|
| - use C/C++ focused debugers with a rust plugin or similar
| (okay, not not compared to idk. debugging python in PyStorm)
|
| - rely on tracing/logging and errors reported (which might
| sound dump as it's basically "not" debugging, but with how the
| rust type system plays out and enforcement of reasonable decent
| code style/structure etc. this is quite often good enough)
|
| - write/extend tests (again a form of "not" debugging, but
| where while a "must have" even if you pinned down the bug using
| a debugger)
|
| - sprinkle in dbg! statements (basically print line debugging)
|
| The fact that it took like 10? yearts for anyone to write more
| then just tweeks to C/C++ debuggers even through rust has a lot
| of enthusiasts is I think telling ;)
|
| Still it looks like a real nice tool to have in your toolbox.
| thurn wrote:
| is this necessarily linux for dependency reasons, or could it be
| on OSX in the future?
| godzie wrote:
| Yes, I think it's possible to support macOS. However, the main
| challenge isn't the operating system itself but rather the
| architecture.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-04-25 23:01 UTC)