On Wed, 30 Nov 2022 at 18:00, François Dumont <frs.dumont@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 30/11/22 14:07, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> > On Wed, 30 Nov 2022 at 11:57, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, 30 Nov 2022 at 11:54, Jonathan Wakely <jwakely@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, 30 Nov 2022 at 06:04, François Dumont via Libstdc++ <libstdc++@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.