Matthew,
Question 1: A factor of 10 is on the high side, but not unusual at the moment. There's a pending issue of making sure that `for` loops or other things are not needlessly instrumented, since they're only part of the expansion instead of the original code. We haven't gotten back to that, but I bet it would help with your program.
Question 2: No, unfortunately.
OK, got it.
Question 3: If the built-in, approximate stack trace is good enough, you can get it with (continuation-mark-set->context (current-continuation-marks))
I just tried that: unfortunately, this stack trace does not seem to be able to cross the boundary of dynamically required module. Or, to be precise, the module that is required via (require-input-port) -- the function that you kindly wrote for me three years ago: https://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/2013-September/059449.html What I see in (continuation-mark-set->context (current-continuation-marks)) are just lines in the "main" Racket module, and no lines that belong to the non-sexp module or deeper. Actually, all I need is the line number of the non-sexp file where the error originated from. I guess, under these circumstances, I should try and make my own continuation marks in the parser/compiler. Best regards, Dmitry -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
