From: Atry (pop.atry_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-05-02 12:11:48
> On 02/05/07, Michael Gopshtein <mgopshtein_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> The 2nd task is more tricky, as if you don't catch the exception in same
>> function where it occurs, but somewhere down the stack, the "normal" stack
>> trace is lost. In our code we keep a "history" of call stacks, and can
>> always print the whole stack.
> That's a neat idea.
> I'm guessing you keep an iterator into the container of calls, then on
> a return just decrement that iterator so you can see the full trace
> even after stack unwinding, then be able to throw away those calls
> when you next call a function? (Or something like that.)
> ~ Scott McMurray
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
Just dump the stack at the exception's constructor.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk