[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: frames / stacks / source? was Re: coverage/profiling
From: |
Han-Wen Nienhuys |
Subject: |
Re: frames / stacks / source? was Re: coverage/profiling |
Date: |
Wed, 10 Jan 2007 12:44:21 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20061219) |
Ludovic Courtès escreveu:
> Hi,
>
> Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> address@hidden info]$ guile
>> guile> (trap-enable 'enter-frame-handler)
>> throw from within critical section.
>> Abortado
>
> Same here with HEAD and 1.8.0. Here's what happens:
>
> #0 0x0fc13f6c in raise () from /lib/tls/libc.so.6
> #1 0x0fc15a0c in abort () from /lib/tls/libc.so.6
> #2 0x0ffa4a1c in scm_ithrow (key=0x10015410, args=0x300a2558,
> noreturn=<value optimized out>) at throw.c:699
> #3 0x0ff3718c in scm_error_scm (key=0x10015410, subr=0x300781f0,
> message=0x300781d0, args=0x300a2578, data=0x4) at error.c:92
> #4 0x0ff37220 in scm_error (key=0x10015410, subr=<value optimized out>,
> message=0xffc5594 "Unknown option name: ~S", args=0x300a2578,
> rest=0x4) at error.c:58
> #5 0x0ff37268 in scm_misc_error (subr=0xfa <Address 0xfa out of bounds>,
> message=0x3001bb60 "", args=0x0) at error.c:268
> #6 0x0ff721a8 in scm_options (args=0x300a25e8, options=0xffe1b40, n=7,
> s=0xffc117c "evaluator-traps-interface") at options.c:202
> #7 0x0ff3a1e4 in scm_evaluator_traps (setting=0x300a25c8) at eval.c:3134
> #8 0x0ff3ec50 in deval (x=<value optimized out>, env=0x300a2668) at
> eval.c:4219
>
> (Note the "Unknown option name"...)
I have added
/* the jump buffer data structure */
@@ -695,7 +696,24 @@ scm_ithrow (SCM key, SCM args, int noret
if (scm_i_critical_section_level)
{
+ SCM s = args;
+ int i = 0;
+
+ /*
+ We have much better routines for displaying Scheme, but we're
+ already inside a pernicious error, and it's unlikely that they
+ are available to us. We try to print something useful anyway,
+ so users don't need a debugger to find out what went wrong.
+ */
fprintf (stderr, "throw from within critical section.\n");
+ if (scm_is_symbol (key))
+ fprintf (stderr, "error key: %s\n", scm_i_symbol_chars (key));
+
+
+ for (; scm_is_pair (s); s = scm_cdr (s), i++)
+ if (scm_is_string (scm_car (s)))
+ fprintf (stderr, "argument %d: %s\n", i, scm_i_string_chars (scm_car
(s)));
+
abort ();
}
I wonder, is there any generic routine for safely printing immediates
and strings/symbols? This might also be a good idea to apply to 1.8.
With lilypond, we occasionally have this problem as well, and it's
a PITA to have to use a debugger to find out about a user-level fault.
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys - address@hidden - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen
- Re: frames / stacks / source? was Re: coverage/profiling, (continued)
- Re: frames / stacks / source? was Re: coverage/profiling, Ludovic Courtès, 2007/01/09
- Re: frames / stacks / source? was Re: coverage/profiling, Kevin Ryde, 2007/01/09
- Re: frames / stacks / source? was Re: coverage/profiling, Neil Jerram, 2007/01/09
- Re: frames / stacks / source? was Re: coverage/profiling, Ludovic Courtès, 2007/01/10
- Re: frames / stacks / source? was Re: coverage/profiling,
Han-Wen Nienhuys <=
- Re: frames / stacks / source? was Re: coverage/profiling, Kevin Ryde, 2007/01/17
- Re: frames / stacks / source? was Re: coverage/profiling, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2007/01/10
- Re: frames / stacks / source? was Re: coverage/profiling, Ludovic Courtès, 2007/01/11
- Re: frames / stacks / source? was Re: coverage/profiling, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2007/01/11
- Re: frames / stacks / source? was Re: coverage/profiling, Ludovic Courtès, 2007/01/11
- Re: frames / stacks / source? was Re: coverage/profiling, Neil Jerram, 2007/01/13
- Re: frames / stacks / source? was Re: coverage/profiling, Kevin Ryde, 2007/01/18
- Re: frames / stacks / source? was Re: coverage/profiling, Neil Jerram, 2007/01/27