From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ian Price Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: Where is the backtrace? Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2014 16:15:40 +0000 Message-ID: <878uuxdosz.fsf@Kagami.home> References: <87d2k9e4va.fsf@Kagami.home> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1388765767 18811 80.91.229.3 (3 Jan 2014 16:16:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2014 16:16:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "guile-user@gnu.org" To: Panicz Maciej Godek Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 03 17:16:15 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-user@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Vz7Pu-0006aj-C0 for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Fri, 03 Jan 2014 17:16:10 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50524 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vz7Pt-0001Qs-Te for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Fri, 03 Jan 2014 11:16:09 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40490) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vz7Pe-0001Jm-2k for guile-user@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Jan 2014 11:15:58 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vz7PW-0001FC-TQ for guile-user@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Jan 2014 11:15:54 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-wi0-x234.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c05::234]:36436) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Vz7PW-0001F8-Cl for guile-user@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Jan 2014 11:15:46 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-wi0-f180.google.com with SMTP id hm19so623485wib.13 for ; Fri, 03 Jan 2014 08:15:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:mail-followup-to:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=4Igqlp0GG0jIpTe5datd81Y6+914uZVHYzKx5yGDs5s=; b=cM53PfsME+EatA1aAtclzzcyWfefifueLTnrdm0dthnIaqjZv+mPy01FAWW+XmoKUK Ead8oSxYyKlAMmNYwKc1flRYnObwiG++wRlbmlMAUrfRedEj45DmpRtJjU47LklHLu2C zl9JDcMI9NexNda2gz3sqS0PS+Xhw+Hu9GZhtOavopTnuVN719QC7+gkVcMg7X++ciGC UYvlv0VJyNxNggtrJ0kvW6iWDQErYORNVhSGgmIeFxhOWYNCP0RgpOe3q+tDphdQXeHC TXStGhL/OzF1KIMOfuoxZh1sGTYtA2mGbszElCt5EjfdUVaB90g63/X/hYsiOr9eBiKo ngZA== X-Received: by 10.194.185.205 with SMTP id fe13mr30024920wjc.23.1388765745628; Fri, 03 Jan 2014 08:15:45 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from Kagami.home (host86-184-83-158.range86-184.btcentralplus.com. [86.184.83.158]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id cx3sm3352960wib.0.2014.01.03.08.15.43 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 03 Jan 2014 08:15:44 -0800 (PST) Mail-Followup-To: Panicz Maciej Godek , "guile-user\@gnu.org" In-Reply-To: (Panicz Maciej Godek's message of "Fri, 3 Jan 2014 14:57:33 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:400c:c05::234 X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:10960 Archived-At: Panicz Maciej Godek writes: > I've checked this with other implementations. Racket, Gambit and Biwa > Scheme were equally uninformative. Kawa's backtrace was a nightmare to > me, but perhaps someone with more knowledge would be able to infer the > actual location of the error. Actually, the only implementation that > exposed the exact location was Chicken. It proves that there must be a > way to track this information in spite of TCO. > It depends on just how much information you want to keep around. Obviously, most of us don't want a full stack trace for a (let loop () (if ... (loop))). There would simply be no (legible) way in Scheme to write an infinite loop without proper tail recursion. I'm not about to argue either side of this, but I will note that I added a wishlist item for improving backtraces to the tracker a while back, and it's free for anyone who wants to, to hack on. See http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=11215. (As for Racket, I suspect you would get better info in the gui than the console version.) -- Ian Price -- shift-reset.com "Programming is like pinball. The reward for doing it well is the opportunity to do it again" - from "The Wizardy Compiled"