for review: stack dumps.

[Peter Schachte]

On Wed, 4 Mar 1998, Andrew Bromage wrote:
> Tyson Dowd wrote:
> > > Could it try dumping the stack from the bottom up rather than
> > > from the top down?
> > 
> > No, because there are no `succip's to follow upwards to find out what
> > procedure was called. You'd have to add more information to the stack
> > frame to be able to do this. 

Can't you traverse down the stack dumping stack info for frames you
recognize and ignoring those you don't?  Or can't you traverse at all if you
don't have the stack frame info?

> As a matter of interest, do you know approximately how much slower
> Mercury runs with the stack dump code in?  It might be worth leaving
> it compiled in by default if it's not very much worse.

As long as the size increase isn't too great, either.


-Peter Schachte			| One never notices what has been done; one
pets at cs.mu.OZ.AU		| can only see what remains to be done.
http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~pets/	| -- Marie Curie 
PGP key available on request	|