c# - Tiny stub of bogus code purely for the purpose of setting a breakpoint (that doesn't create a compiler warning) -


this trivial question find myself thinking time - when debugging, want break right after line of code executes, , rather putting breakpoint on next line of code (which may ways down due large comment blocks, or putting on last line of code , hitting f10 go on after breaks, have urge put short stub line on set breakpoint.

in vba i'd use doevents this, shortest thing in c# i've found doesn't create annoying compiler warning (the variable 'x' declared never used) is:

int x = 1; x++; 

is can get, or there other obvious approach i'm not aware of?

note: aware of suppressing warnings via:

#pragma warning disable 0168    // rid of 'variable never used warning' 

...but find sporadically doesn't work.

for debugging purposes, use system.diagnostics.debugger.break(). in practice, it's inserting break point on statement easier determine function after fact, , maintained through source control between users , systems. doesn't clutter breakpoints window. also, helpfully enough, not trigger when running in release mode, allowing place these in areas of critical importance, , leave them in without harming customer releases.

as alternate suggestion, following inbetween's comment:

if, instead, looking "harmless" statement can set breakpoint on when desire, thread.sleep(0) should similar enough anecdotal vba solution suffice debugging purposes.

thread.sleep(0). tells system want forfeit rest of thread’s timeslice , let another, waiting, thread run.

-- http://blogs.msmvps.com/peterritchie/2007/04/26/thread-sleep-is-a-sign-of-a-poorly-designed-program/

this less ideal solution in mind first suggestion, may more you're looking for.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

PHP DOM loadHTML() method unusual warning -

python - How to create jsonb index using GIN on SQLAlchemy? -

c# - TransactionScope not rolling back although no complete() is called -