Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: [boost] [stacktrace] Stacktrace library review
From: Vladimir Batov (Vladimir.Batov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-12-14 04:55:10

> Do you think the library should be accepted as a Boost
> library?

Yes. I personally very much believe the library should be accepted. I
myself use a similar facility to identify and to address a problem
promptly when reported by a customer. I am fortunate to only work on
Linux. Having a multi-platform community-reviewed community-tested
facility would be a much better solution.

I have not used the library. However, when it's in Boost I'll make use
of it immediately. Can't say much about implementation either. However,
the interface and the output seemed straightforward and sensible...
Although in my implementation I decided not to report the superfluous

0# boost::stacktrace::detail::backend::backend(void**, unsigned long)

Additionally the number of macros seemed surprisingly high and I might
say worrisome. Are they really that unavoidable? After all, it's almost
2017 outside. Secondly, when it crashes out there on the customer site,
I want as much info as I can get. So, if the default mode is configured
accordingly and, consequently, eases the deployment, that'd be of great

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at