From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id RAA03800; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 17:47:24 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f 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 RAA03796 for ; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 17:47:23 +0200 (MET DST) 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 f36FlK512960; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 17:47:20 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from xleroy@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id RAA03792; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 17:47:21 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 17:47:21 +0200 From: Xavier Leroy To: Ohad Rodeh Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] exception tracing with Threads Message-ID: <20010406174721.C3481@pauillac.inria.fr> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: ; from orodeh@cs.huji.ac.il on Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 03:55:53PM +0200 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk > I've just tried to use the exception tracing > mechanism for threads. Unfortunately, when using > threads this option is not enabled. Right. That's an oversight. I agree it would be useful to have a stack backtrace for threads that terminate on an exception. It's not absolutely trivial to implement, though. I push this on my to do stack. - Xavier Leroy ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr. Archives: http://caml.inria.fr