Looks perfect to me, thanks.
On 06/12/22 22:44, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On Wed, 30 Nov 2022 at 18:00, François Dumont <frs.dum...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 30/11/22 14:07, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On Wed, 30 Nov 2022 at 11:57, Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com> wrote:
On Wed, 30 Nov 2022 at 11:54, Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com> wrote:
On Wed, 30 Nov 2022 at 06:04, François Dumont via Libstdc++
<libstd...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
Good catch, then we also need this patch.
Is it worth printing an error? If we can't show the backtrace because of an
error, we can just print nothing there.
No strong opinion on that but if we do not print anything the output
will be:
Backtrace:
Error: ...
I just considered that it did not cost much to report the issue to the
user that defined _GLIBCXX_DEBUG_BACKTRACE and so is expecting a backtrace.
Maybe printing "Backtrace:\n" could be done in the normal callback
leaving the user with the feeling that _GLIBCXX_DEBUG_BACKTRACE does not
work.
OK, how's this?
Tested x86_64-linux.
