From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10891 invoked by alias); 12 Jul 2006 20:05:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 10883 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Jul 2006 20:05:08 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 12 Jul 2006 20:05:07 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k6CK555w022620; Wed, 12 Jul 2006 16:05:05 -0400 Received: from pobox.toronto.redhat.com (pobox.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.4]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k6CK548B028260; Wed, 12 Jul 2006 16:05:04 -0400 Received: from [172.16.14.67] (towel.toronto.redhat.com [172.16.14.67]) by pobox.toronto.redhat.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k6CK54ve010766; Wed, 12 Jul 2006 16:05:04 -0400 Message-ID: <44B555F0.300@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2006 20:05:00 -0000 From: Bryce McKinlay User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20051025) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ranjit Mathew CC: java-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [MinGW] RFA: Make Stack Traces Work for Interpreted Code on Windows References: <44B3E70F.4070009@redhat.com> <39399b9d0607111134yb7d0314i1e68fa4ef6773b03@mail.gmail.com> <44B4196D.8070808@redhat.com> <44B53154.6030402@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <44B53154.6030402@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact java-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: java-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2006-q3/txt/msg00115.txt.bz2 Ranjit Mathew wrote: >> I think you could just overload them with #defines in backtrace.h? >> Failing that, I think that adding a couple of #ifdef's in UnwindTraceFn >> is not as bad as the code duplication. >> > > That worked pretty nicely, thank you. It reduces unnecessary > duplication of code too. The attached patch implements it and > was tested using a crossed-native compiler for i686-pc-mingw32. > I still get usable stack traces for compiled and interpreted > code. > > OK? > It occurs to me that you could now actually #define fallback_backtrace as _Unwind_Backtrace, and get rid of some #ifdefs in stacktrace.cc. Do you think that is worth doing? Otherwise, this is OK for trunk. Bryce