I like the idea of a -g flag. I actually think AOT will be used increasingly in development scenarios for "code you're not changing" (but may, at some point, want to see in a backtrace) since the temptation for internal libraries and such is to AOT them for speed, once they're basically debugged and working. The code that calls them may not be, however. :)
- Jordan On Sep 17, 2010, at 7:02 PM, Laurent Sansonetti wrote: > On Sep 17, 2010, at 6:34 PM, Steven Parkes wrote: >>> Sorry I haven't seen this thread for a reason. >> >> No worries; I wouldn't think of complaining. >> >> I figured out what's quashing things: I don't get backtraces when I run from >> a mach executable with dylibs/bundles. I'm not sure which or both of those >> is causing the issue. > > Oh I see the problem then. It is true that the backtracing metadata is > forgotten during AOT compilation. It's actually on purpose (to avoid > sensitive information to be in the binary), but we should maybe make macrubyc > accept -g (like gcc) which would support it. In theory AOT compilation isn't > used for development, but I agree that sometimes you might want to do it. > > Laurent > _______________________________________________ > MacRuby-devel mailing list > MacRuby-devel@lists.macosforge.org > http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macruby-devel _______________________________________________ MacRuby-devel mailing list MacRuby-devel@lists.macosforge.org http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macruby-devel
