On Sat 21 Jan 2017 11:21, Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[email protected]> writes:
> I often find myself struggling to pinpoint an error location from > Guile's backtrace (see below) and I am starting to wonder if there is > something that I'm missing. I believe this is comprehensively cleaned up and improved in 2.1.x. (Guile 2.0 tries to identify the procedure by looking at slot 0; Guile 2.2 instead uses the instruction pointer of the frame.) Can you confirm? Andy
