• sleek (1/1) Aug 27 2008 Is there an easy way to get a stack trace when an exception is caught?
• Jesse Phillips (2/3) Aug 27 2008 I believe that is currently a no.
• Robert Fraser (15/16) Aug 27 2008 The only way I know of currently is
• Christopher Wright (9/10) Aug 27 2008 On Linux, there's a library called jive floating around. It may be
• Frank Benoit (3/15) Aug 28 2008 I use Jive a lot on linux. I put a copy on the DWT project page:
• Jarrett Billingsley (10/11) Aug 27 2008 On Windows, you can run your program in ddbg, and it will print out a st...
• Jarrett Billingsley (5/17) Aug 27 2008 The downside here of course being that it's an external program and not ...
• Christopher Wright (4/28) Aug 28 2008 Conversely, when do you explicitly want a lacok of debug information on
• sleek (5/18) Aug 28 2008 After considering this for a few hours, I think ddbg is my best bet here...

"sleek" <cslush gmail.com> writes:

Is there an easy way to get a stack trace when an exception is caught? 

Jesse Phillips <jessekphillips gmail.com> writes:

On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 20:18:30 -0400, sleek wrote:

 Is there an easy way to get a stack trace when an exception is caught?

I believe that is currently a no.

Robert Fraser <fraserofthenight gmail.com> writes:

sleek wrote:
 Is there an easy way to get a stack trace when an exception is caught? 

The only way I know of currently is 
http://petermodzelewski.blogspot.com/2008/01/development-in-d-with-u
e-of-backtrace.html 
. It's Windows-only. However, my most recent test of the binary tango 
libs ( 
http://petermodzelewski.blogspot.com/2008/08/tango-patched-libs-for-0997.html 
) had some linking issue, and I was too lazy to follow up on it. There's 
a Phobos hack there as well as the Tango one, I haven't tried that.

Flectioned ( flectioned.kuehne.cn ) used to be able to do it, but it 
hasn't been updated for over a year. I know the Tango one no longer 
compiles (though it shouldn't be _too_ much work to get it to do so). 
Phobos might still work. To trace non-user-defined exceptions with it 
you need to call TracedException.traceAllExceptions(true); Flectioned 
works better on Linux (on Windows, it won't trace segfaults/access 
violations).

Christopher Wright <dhasenan gmail.com> writes:

sleek wrote:
 Is there an easy way to get a stack trace when an exception is caught? 

On Linux, there's a library called jive floating around. It may be 
tango-only, and the official version is defunct, but you can find 
versions of it updated to more recent versions of D and tango.

I know for a fact that it doesn't help when you segfault due to stack 
overflow (debugging a circular dependency verifier in dconstructor; it 
only takes a couple seconds to overflow your stack, but it takes ages if 
you're printing to stdout in the meantime). I don't know whether it 
catches other segmentation faults, though.

Frank Benoit <keinfarbton googlemail.com> writes:

Christopher Wright schrieb:
 sleek wrote:
 Is there an easy way to get a stack trace when an exception is caught? 

 
 On Linux, there's a library called jive floating around. It may be
 tango-only, and the official version is defunct, but you can find
 versions of it updated to more recent versions of D and tango.
 
 I know for a fact that it doesn't help when you segfault due to stack
 overflow (debugging a circular dependency verifier in dconstructor; it
 only takes a couple seconds to overflow your stack, but it takes ages if
 you're printing to stdout in the meantime). I don't know whether it
 catches other segmentation faults, though.

I use Jive a lot on linux. I put a copy on the DWT project page:
http://downloads.dsource.org/projects/dwt/jive.zip

"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> writes:

"sleek" <cslush gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:g94qsm$t5$1 digitalmars.com...
 Is there an easy way to get a stack trace when an exception is caught?

On Windows, you can run your program in ddbg, and it will print out a stack 
trace when you get an exception (segfaults/stack overflows included) as long 
as you compiled your program with debug symbols (-g).

You can get it here: http://ddbg.mainia.de/releases.html

You just use

ddbg -cmd="r" myprog.exe

on the commandline to load your program and immediately start running it.

On linux... yeah I don't know. 

"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> writes:

"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:g95d2h$1ojq$1 digitalmars.com...
 "sleek" <cslush gmail.com> wrote in message 
 news:g94qsm$t5$1 digitalmars.com...
 Is there an easy way to get a stack trace when an exception is caught?

 On Windows, you can run your program in ddbg, and it will print out a 
 stack trace when you get an exception (segfaults/stack overflows included) 
 as long as you compiled your program with debug symbols (-g).

 You can get it here: http://ddbg.mainia.de/releases.html

 You just use

 ddbg -cmd="r" myprog.exe

 on the commandline to load your program and immediately start running it.

 On linux... yeah I don't know.

The downside here of course being that it's an external program and not a 
library/part of the language, but hey, how often do you need a stack trace 
unless you're debugging? 

Christopher Wright <dhasenan gmail.com> writes:

Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
 "Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> wrote in message 
 news:g95d2h$1ojq$1 digitalmars.com...
 "sleek" <cslush gmail.com> wrote in message 
 news:g94qsm$t5$1 digitalmars.com...
 Is there an easy way to get a stack trace when an exception is caught?

 On Windows, you can run your program in ddbg, and it will print out a 
 stack trace when you get an exception (segfaults/stack overflows included) 
 as long as you compiled your program with debug symbols (-g).

 You can get it here: http://ddbg.mainia.de/releases.html

 You just use

 ddbg -cmd="r" myprog.exe

 on the commandline to load your program and immediately start running it.

 On linux... yeah I don't know.

 
 The downside here of course being that it's an external program and not a 
 library/part of the language, but hey, how often do you need a stack trace 
 unless you're debugging? 

Conversely, when do you explicitly want a lacok of debug information on 
a crash? Maybe if you're distributing a super-secret closed source 
application, but that's the only situation I can think of.

"sleek" <cslush gmail.com> writes:

After considering this for a few hours, I think ddbg is my best bet here. 
Quite honestly, I should only be catching known exceptions. Anything else 
that occurs that is unexpected should absolutely bubble up and out.


"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> wrote in message 
news:g95d2h$1ojq$1 digitalmars.com...
 "sleek" <cslush gmail.com> wrote in message 
 news:g94qsm$t5$1 digitalmars.com...
 Is there an easy way to get a stack trace when an exception is caught?

 On Windows, you can run your program in ddbg, and it will print out a 
 stack trace when you get an exception (segfaults/stack overflows included) 
 as long as you compiled your program with debug symbols (-g).

 You can get it here: http://ddbg.mainia.de/releases.html

 You just use

 ddbg -cmd="r" myprog.exe

 on the commandline to load your program and immediately start running it.

 On linux... yeah I don't know.