From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-04-20 19:21:22
Dirk Reiners wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I would be very interested, but having to instrument the code makes the use too
> complicated IMHO.
I agree, that's what logging is for...course we don't have that lib either :-(
> There are some systems out there that do stack traces (I know VRJuggler does
> them, and so does bugle, and probably many others), so there is probably code to
> start with, if somebody wants to give it a try. The system-dependence and symbol
> demangling makes it somewhat painful...
>
The code I pointed to earlier uses non-standard API calls (others have pointed
out similar facilities) to get a stack trace. Ultimately at the next layer up
what I want is something like:
//snaps stack state at time of construction
class FancyException : std::exception()
public:
FancyException(const std::string& what);
std::string backtrace()
}:
...
throw FancyException("Oh no");
...
catch (FancyException& e) {
std::cerr << e.what() << std::endl;
std::cerr << e.backtrace() << std::endl;
}
Or you could have a vector of strings for each stack element. I think
something like this could be done as a portable interface...it's just you'd
get different information in the trace depending on how things are compiled,
what platform, etc.
Jeff