Jonathan M Davis, el 30 de julio a las 10:22 me escribiste: > On Friday, July 30, 2010 09:41:56 Steve Schveighoffer wrote: > > Calm down :) I don't know anything about stack traces, I thought you could > > not know the stack trace until you unwound the stack. If that's not true, > > then excuse my ignorance, and by all means, call abort at the point the > > exception is thrown after printing a stack trace. > > You can get at the stack trace in the core dump with gdb. It's just way more > of > a pain than getting it when it's printed to the console. It's actually pretty > amazing how much stuff is sitting in a core dump. Personally, I generally > don't > care about having anywhere near that much info, or if I do, I'd rather be > debugging the program directly, but there is quite a lot of useful info > there, > and the stack trace is definitely on the list.
Sometimes bugs are not that easy to reproduce, and having a core dump in those cases to inspect the dead program can be a life saver (talking out of experience). But again, calling abort() != dumping a core, it just give you the option. -- Leandro Lucarella (AKA luca) http://llucax.com.ar/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145 104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Charles Chaplin once won 3rd price in a Charles Chaplin look-a-like contest _______________________________________________ phobos mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
