It only takes memory snapshots to find next end-of-loop instruction in binary code to jump to it, with source equivalent of it being:
while True:
if loop_var > 9000:
break
loop_var += 1
My main complaint that might as well detect a repeat in snapshot but I really doubt that it detects extraneous changes in loop variables that might be caused by stray infinite loop logic.
From programming perspective it's better to crash hard and let the error be known rather than fail silently and introduce more sublte errors.
From user perspective, what is the point of saving file in a program that is falling over when you could potentially save a corrupt file and instead of retaining some of the work the user will end up with a blob of useless data. I guess you could do Save As... and then manually compare changed data with last save. Still I'd be extremelly suspicious of it.
From programming perspective it's better to crash hard and let the error be known rather than fail silently and introduce more sublte errors.
From user perspective, what is the point of saving file in a program that is falling over when you could potentially save a corrupt file and instead of retaining some of the work the user will end up with a blob of useless data. I guess you could do Save As... and then manually compare changed data with last save. Still I'd be extremelly suspicious of it.
I am absolutely shocked that nobody else has even hinted at this. I wouldn't recommend this tool in almost any circumstance.
From programming perspective it's better to crash hard and let the error be known rather than fail silently and introduce more sublte errors.
From user perspective, what is the point of saving file in a program that is falling over when you could potentially save a corrupt file and instead of retaining some of the work the user will end up with a blob of useless data. I guess you could do Save As... and then manually compare changed data with last save. Still I'd be extremelly suspicious of it.