Subject: Re: [boost] [Stacktrace] Second review begins today 17th Mar ends 26th Mar
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-03-20 21:06:11
Antony Polukhin wrote:
> It is required to produce anything useful from frame/stacktrace.
> Following operations use COM (on MSVC only):
> * ostreaming stacktrace
> * ostreaming frame
> * getting function name from frame
> * getting source file location from frame
> * getting line in source file from frame
Yes, and the request is to not include COM/windows.h in programs or
translation units that don't do any of the above.
Please take a look in my message in which I outline three alternative
approaches to achieve this aim; maybe one of those would sit well with you.
> Also I can not see how you're going to use the library without 95% of
As already stated:
- A header-only library constructs a stack trace, f.ex. to include it when
throwing an exception
- A user of this header-only library ignores the stack trace because he is
not familiar with the stacktrace library and is unaware of the existence of
The goal here is to not include COM/windows.h in this user's code, or
require him to link with libboost_stacktrace.
If this is not done, the authors of header-only libraries can't painlessly
transition to using stacktrace to include stack traces in their exceptions
because their users will complain about windows.h/COM or link errors. And we
want libraries to use stacktrace to include stack traces in their
exceptions, because this is a good thing that some of their users will
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk