From: Victor A. Wagner, Jr. (vawjr_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-06-21 15:50:18
At Friday 2002/06/21 04:17, you wrote:
>"Victor A. Wagner, Jr." <vawjr_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > [...]
> > In my opinion, this decision hinders effective debugging so badly that it
> > should be re-considered (If I knew how to write such a suggestion, I would
> > certainly so do). [...]
> > Think how _simple_ it would be to provide a "stack trace" if the stack
> > still intact!!
> > Think of how much information would be available to a modern debugger!!
> Mhmm. I don't see your point. This information _is_
> available in the exception's ctor. You say things
> would be a lot better if it was available in the
> catch handler. Where's the difference?
If you put a breakpoint in the catch block (because you know that's where
your getting) it makes a HUGE difference.
The problem basically trying to determine where the _throw_ occurred.
> Or is it that you're concerned about exception types
> you have no control over? (I rarely had a problem
> with this.)
> > [...]
>Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Victor A. Wagner Jr. http://rudbek.com
PGP RSA fingerprint = 4D20 EBF6 0101 B069 3817 8DBF C846 E47A
PGP D-H fingerprint = 98BC 65E3 1A19 43EC 3908 65B9 F755 E6F4 63BB 9D93
The five most dangerous words in the English language:
"There oughta be a law"
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk