2009/12/1 Jochen Theodorou <[email protected]>: > Neal Gafter schrieb: >> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 4:31 AM, Jochen Theodorou <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> Wouldn't it be possible to give an method an attribute so it will no add >> that stack frame to the exception? Is there a problem for the VM to >> do that? >> >> >> The .NET platform uses this solution. You put an attribute (the >> equivalent to a Java annotation) on the methods that you don't want to >> appear in the stack trace, and the VM does the rest. > > yeah, thought .NET would have a solution for this. And I agree with > Kjetil Valstadsve, that it would good to have an option to turn it off > too. I wonder what problem the JVM could have with that. It is not like > stack frames are not generated or removed like you may want it for tail > recursion. This problem should be much more easy to solve. Maybe I > should do a RFE?
Perhaps the exception cold contain two stack traces - a full and an edited one. The edited one would be the default but the full one could be accessed if needed. John Wilson -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM Languages" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages?hl=en.
