From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id MAA18424 for caml-red; Mon, 30 Oct 2000 12:09:56 +0100 (MET) Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA17470 for ; Mon, 30 Oct 2000 12:02:47 +0100 (MET) Received: from pauillac.inria.fr (pauillac.inria.fr [128.93.11.35]) by concorde.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id e9UB2jP12140; Mon, 30 Oct 2000 12:02:45 +0100 (MET) Received: (from weis@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id MAA16616; Mon, 30 Oct 2000 12:02:45 +0100 (MET) From: Pierre Weis Message-Id: <200010301102.MAA16616@pauillac.inria.fr> Subject: Re: Where did the exception occur? In-Reply-To: from Ohad Rodeh at "Oct 30, 100 09:57:29 am" To: orodeh@cs.huji.ac.il (Ohad Rodeh) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 12:02:45 +0100 (MET) Cc: caml-list@inria.fr X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL28 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: weis@pauillac.inria.fr > List, > I'd like to point out, that my application (LARGE OCaml project) is > embedded in C code, so one cannot use the OCaml debugger to replay and > find the exception. I'd be happy if a feature would be added to the > language to point out which line in the code the exception came from (I > understand this was added to SML ?). > > Ohad. Have you tried François Pessaux's spurious exceptions static analyser ? Otherwise, the addition you mentioned is interesting, if only we could implement it with no penalty on the speed of exception raising. Have you an idea of such a compilation scheme ? Pierre Weis INRIA, Projet Cristal, Pierre.Weis@inria.fr, http://cristal.inria.fr/~weis/