Re: [racket-users] How to get information about where an error occurs, in a stack trace context?

> > The calls that are missing appear to tail calls, and Racket performs > tail-call optimization, so I imagine those missing functions are not > really "on the stack" at the time of the error. > > I don't know that there is a way around this except to deliberately > subvert the tail-call

Re: [racket-users] How to get information about where an error occurs, in a stack trace context?

On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 09:04:49PM -0800, thomas.lynch wrote: > I have a related question. I turned on error trace using the command line > Robby > suggested, but it doesn't give me a trace, but rather just the call point and > error function. Here is an example, the trace should be f -> gg ->

Re: [racket-users] How to get information about where an error occurs, in a stack trace context?

I have a related question. I turned on error trace using the command line Robby suggested, but it doesn't give me a trace, but rather just the call point and error function. Here is an example, the trace should be f -> gg -> g -> hh -> h then bang, the error. But instead Racket shows me f

Re: [racket-users] How to get information about where an error occurs, in a stack trace context?

At Sun, 8 Nov 2015 21:56:04 -0500, Ben Lerner wrote: > > On 11/8/2015 9:18 PM, Nota Poin wrote: > >> Or if you insist on command line usage, use error trace. > > What's wrong with command line usage? Anyway, I was going to say this: > > > >

[racket-users] How to get information about where an error occurs, in a stack trace context?

I'll have code like this: #lang racket/base (define (baz foo) (error 'whoops)) (define (bar ber) (baz ber)) (define (foo ber) (let ((a 3)) (if (and (= a 3) (= (* a 9) 27) (bar ber) (list? (list 1 2 3 4)))

Re: [racket-users] How to get information about where an error occurs, in a stack trace context?

On Monday, November 9, 2015 at 1:38:56 AM UTC, Matthias Felleisen wrote: > Use drracket. Yeah, I would, but it takes about 30 seconds to start up if I disable all the extensions, add another 10 or 20 for the debugger, and then when I type it lags behind at about 0.25s per character. Also it

Re: [racket-users] How to get information about where an error occurs, in a stack trace context?

On 11/8/2015 9:18 PM, Nota Poin wrote: Or if you insist on command line usage, use error trace. What's wrong with command line usage? Anyway, I was going to say this: http://docs.racket-lang.org/errortrace/using-errortrace.html That seems to enable stack traces that work. Relatedly, is

Re: [racket-users] How to get information about where an error occurs, in a stack trace context?

How much memory do you have on your machine? 0.25 seconds per keystroke sounds worse than expected. Robby On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 8:18 PM, Nota Poin wrote: > On Monday, November 9, 2015 at 1:38:56 AM UTC, Matthias Felleisen wrote: >> Use drracket. > Yeah, I would, but it