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: 103376,91c5b958fecf5eff
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: GNAT exception traceback
Date: 1997/06/13
Message-ID: <dewar.866242346@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 248248580
References: <199706131810.OAA07239@seahunt.ctron.com>
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-06-13T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Huy says

<< 
I'd think dumping a core would be nice; at least you can look at the call
stack. But doing it the C way would be sacrilegious, right?
 >>

No, that's the point, you can't look at the call stack in a core dump, because
by the time you know an exception is unhandled, it's too late, the stack has
been unwound and destroyed. This is something that needs improving in future
versions of GNAT (the SGI version of GNAT using WORKSHOP handles this nicely
right now).