From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,fbd3a4df7893995d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: mgk25@cl.cam.ac.uk (Markus Kuhn) Subject: Re: GNAT/Ada Traceback Information? Date: 1999/06/06 Message-ID: <7jerlk$bt9$1@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 486442049 References: <375AB243.F2176DA5@voyager.net> Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-06-06T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <375AB243.F2176DA5@voyager.net>, Henry Rosenbrock writes: |> I was looking for an Ada standard way of recording the traceback |> information for exceptions. With our current Ada83 compiler(VADS) we had |> to write assembly code to manually trace back the stack within the |> exception handlers. When I started to investigate GNAT and Ada95, I |> noticed that the information was said to be stored in the |> Ada.Exceptions.Exception_Occurence. The type was private, but that can |> be easily fixed. The problem is that no traceback information is ever |> stored into the structure. Does anybody know if this structure was |> created for future enhancements or if it us only active for certain |> targets? Our final target is a PowerPC, but I am current doing the |> research on a Linux i686 box. The usual well-informend sources of rumours about the next GNAT revision tell us that there will be a big improvement in this respect coming with GNAT 3.12. On some platforms, I hear, the traceback can even be displayed with symbolic information, although I don't know whether this will also be already available for Linux/ix86. Symbolic tracebacks (and also core dumps for non-handled exceptions with the stack fully intact) would be a wonderful help in handling Murphy's law variant 42b that there is "The most interesting and difficult to reproduce bugs always show up when you are not running the debugger." Markus -- Markus G. Kuhn, Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge, UK Email: mkuhn at acm.org, WWW: