Dimitrie O. Paun a écrit :
On Thu, 19 Feb 2004, Eric Pouech wrote:
perhaps the easiest way to implement what you want would be to create a
specific exception (like wine_stack_walk). This exception would be very
close to the one for undefined symbols. You would insert throwing this
except in th
On Thu, 19 Feb 2004, Eric Pouech wrote:
> perhaps the easiest way to implement what you want would be to create a
> specific exception (like wine_stack_walk). This exception would be very
> close to the one for undefined symbols. You would insert throwing this
> except in the places you want in
Robert Shearman a écrit :
Mike Hearn wrote:
On Wed, 2004-02-18 at 19:49, Eric Pouech wrote:
this would be as intrusive as using the debugger (I assume that the
running process would be in charge of printing the backtrace, or an
external process - like a debugger - would print the backtrace, while
>this would be as intrusive as using the debugger (I assume that the running process
>would be in charge of printing the backtrace, or an external process - like a
>debugger - would print the backtrace, while the program is stopped (or after copying
>the stack for instrospection, which dbghelp
Mike Hearn wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-02-18 at 19:49, Eric Pouech wrote:
> > this would be as intrusive as using the debugger (I assume that the
> > running process would be in charge of printing the backtrace, or an
> > external process - like a debugger - would print the backtrace, while
> > the progr
On Wed, 2004-02-18 at 19:49, Eric Pouech wrote:
> this would be as intrusive as using the debugger (I assume that the
> running process would be in charge of printing the backtrace, or an
> external process - like a debugger - would print the backtrace, while
> the program is stopped (or after c
Mike Hearn a écrit :
On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 11:19:10 +0100, Fabian Cenedese wrote:
But besides that: I like to have the full picture of what was going on,
from program start to end. And it could also be that a function was
called differently on different occasions. (If there was only one possibility
On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 11:19:10 +0100, Fabian Cenedese wrote:
> But besides that: I like to have the full picture of what was going on,
> from program start to end. And it could also be that a function was
> called differently on different occasions. (If there was only one possibility
> a simple grep
>>Is it possible to output the backtrace while the program is running? I
>>mean that with a new debug command e.g. wine_dbg_bt or so you
>>could output not only the name of the called function and the argument
>>values (as with the debug channels) but also the call stack where it
>>came from. That
why can't you Just use a debugger?
Fabian Cenedese wrote:
Hi
Is it possible to output the backtrace while the program is running? I
mean that with a new debug command e.g. wine_dbg_bt or so you
could output not only the name of the called function and the argument
values (as with the debug chann
Hi
Is it possible to output the backtrace while the program is running? I
mean that with a new debug command e.g. wine_dbg_bt or so you
could output not only the name of the called function and the argument
values (as with the debug channels) but also the call stack where it
came from. That's of c
11 matches
Mail list logo
