On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 10:53 PM, Filip Pizlo <[email protected]> wrote:
> I would also like to see this standardized. Comments inline. > > > On Sep 27, 2014, at 10:15 PM, John Lenz <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I would like to get see stack traces standardized for ES7, to that end, > I would like to define a minimal set of behaviors that would need to be > defined: > > > > * the "stack" property (a string) > > * when the stack property is attached (at Error object creation or at > throw) > > * what happens when Error object that has been thrown, is thrown again > (nothing) > > * the stack trace in the face of tail recursion optimizations (skipped?) > > Is that really necessary? If so, can you say something about the > motivation? > > You can do some tail recursion optimizations while preserving the stack > trace. For example if you call yourself recursively and the JIT turns it > into a loop, then all you need is the loop trip count to recover the > original stack trace. > I really have no idea what the behavior should be in the faces of optimized tail calls (which is must broader than simply self recursive methods that can be rewritten as a loop). I've seen various suggestions (a capped call history) but I'm curious how efficient functional languages deal with this. I haven't actually seen anything about tail recursion optimizations being implemented, have any of the VM actually tried or committed to implementing tail call optimizations? > > > * the minimal information that a stack trace should contain (file, line, > column) > > * the format of the minimal information > > * how additional information is added to the stack trace (named evals, > etc) > > > > Does this sound like a reasonable minimal set? > > +1 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > es-discuss mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
