Backtrace (call stack) feature request

Backtrace (call stack) feature request

[Fabrice Gautier]

Hi,

I've noticed a difference between the information shown by the bt command
and the information shown by the call stack window:

The bt command shows the name and value of the parameter for each function,
the call stack window shows the type of the parameter.

I prefer the bt way. And would like to have the same in the window.

Thanks
-- 
Fabrice Gautier
fabrice_gautier@sdesigns.com 

Re: Backtrace (call stack) feature request

[Keith Seitz]

Fabrice Gautier wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I've noticed a difference between the information shown by the bt command
> and the information shown by the call stack window:
> 
> The bt command shows the name and value of the parameter for each function,
> the call stack window shows the type of the parameter.
> 
> I prefer the bt way. And would like to have the same in the window.
> 

For the record, I do, too. However, getting this information from gdb is
a MAJOR pain. Yes, I am the one to blame for the stack window (well, not
the window, just the info in it).

I got *really* sick and tired of waiting ten minutes for a stack trace
in gdbtk. I implemented what is currently being used and stack traces
got very fast.

I'm not sure that there is too much more that we can do with it without
really slowing it down or teaching gdb how to give us the information we
want. The problem is getting the values of variables. It's a nightmare
-- and I should know: I did them all. :-(

Sigh.
Keith

PS. I don't know of any other graphical debugger that will give you args
in the call stack, so we're not alone. All of them will show args in the
"locals" window (or equivalent). Sigh.