http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6088
--- Comment #11 from Rainer Schuetze <[email protected]> 2012-02-05 11:50:46 PST --- >What works exactly? Win7 x64: http://i.imgur.com/r2Tl4.png >Where's the stack overflow error? You are right, my previous tests have been with access violations and explicite throw. A stack overflow is a lot nastier and another stack overflow is raised while trying to create the stack trace. BTW: even when a stack trace is printed, it doesn't show a lot of useful information in the original example: char*p; int foo(int n) { if(n==99990) *p = 1; return n ? foo(n - 1) : 1; } void main() { foo(100_000); } c:\>dmd -g test.d c:\>test object.Error: Access Violation ---------------- ... ---------------- It seems better with non-recursive functions, but actually, I don't care. I usually use a dirty hack to get rid of stack trace generation in exceptions. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
