On Tue, 2007-04-03 at 15:51 +0200, Rhythmic Fistman wrote: > skaller disse: > > [...] > > > Yep. I understand. It's possible in principle to trace heaped > > spaghetti stack frames inside Felix, since they're sure to have > > Felix RTTI (which include the type name etc). > > > > The machine stack can't be traced by Felix, any more than > > you can get one in C: if you want a snapshot of the stack > > at some point you have to use a debugger like gdb or > > Visual Studio: Felix generates C++ code. > > There's not much point tracing the machine stack in felix code > as it's almost always trivial/one call deep. I think Artem would > be referring to felix call chain traces.
That's typically true in procedural code, but not recursive functional code. Non-recursive functional code is usually flattened into procedural code. I hope to put more emphasis in Felix on high level typing and proof of correctness than debugging .. but that's a long way off and will never be fully realised in a C++ upgrade language. -- John Skaller <skaller at users dot sf dot net> Felix, successor to C++: http://felix.sf.net ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Felix-language mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/felix-language
