On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 5:12 PM, Scott West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 4:43 PM, Don Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > saynte: > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 3:02 PM, Denis Bueno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 2:55 PM, Don Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > You can use the profiler to get a stack trace, or use the new > > > > > GHCi debugger to step backwards from the exception to the source. > > > > > > > > > > I wrote a bit of a tutorial for this here: > > > > > > > > > > http://cgi.cse.unsw.edu.au/~dons/blog/2007/11/14#no-exceptions > > > > > > > > Section 6.3 of http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Debugging also is > > > > relevant for using ghcu to step backward ... perhaps the section > label > > > > is misleading, though. Feel free to modify as needed if you find the > > > > ghci stepper lets you find the problem > > > > > > Well, when using +RTS -xc, I get: > > > > > > <GHC.Err.CAF><GHC.Err.CAF>Prelude.undefined > > > > > > I'm not really sure what to do with this, not really the stacktrace I > > > was hoping for. The ghci debugger I found was really quite nice, up > > > until it his some portion of code that it isn't interpreting. By not > > > "interpreting" i mean things that have been already been compiled and > > > it's just calling (even if it has been compiled with profiling). I > > > have a feeling that my problem is somewhere in something that has > > > already been compiled. > > > > Is it possible to just load all the code interpreted? Or is the problem > > in a dependent library? > > > > If you profile and let the program terminate, there should be a stack > > trace in the .prof as well. > > > > -- Don > > > > Well, I can load a bunch of it interpreted. I've already done this as > far as I think I can. The only pieces laying outside the interpreter > are the GHC libraries and Gtk2Hs. The really funny thing, is that > (essentially) I believe the error results from a call to "fromDynamic" > out of Data.Dynamic. This sort of leads me to believe that someone's > "Typeable" instance is being funny. Again though, all the Typeable's > in the immediate area of my code seem to be fine. > > (the .prof didn't seem to reveal anything yet... I'll look it over a > little more closely though) > > Regards, > Scott >
I did finally find the error (in one of the pieces of code not written by myself). A few instances of Typeable were trying to pattern match their arguments. *bomb* In either case, it was an interesting experience! Thanks for the help all! Regards, Scott _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe