From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Sympa-To: caml-list@inria.fr Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82]) by walapai.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id q3D9XRgA001620 for ; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 11:33:28 +0200 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: An4BAHnxh08machwl2dsb2JhbABCuCIBAQEBAQYYBzuCCQEBBTo/EAsYLhRJiCS2bJB0YwSVa4lXiUg X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,415,1330902000"; d="scan'208";a="153898762" Received: from mx1.janestreet.com (HELO nyc-dmz-mxout1.janestreet.com) ([38.105.200.112]) by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 13 Apr 2012 11:33:22 +0200 Received: from nyc-qsv-mail1.delacy.com ([172.25.22.57]) by nyc-dmz-mxout1.janestreet.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1SIcsZ-0005GR-Af; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 05:33:19 -0400 Received: from nyc-qsv-006.delacy.com ([172.25.22.197] helo=qsmtp.delacy.com) by nyc-qsv-mail1.delacy.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1SIcsZ-0003qq-9I; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 05:33:19 -0400 Received: from ldn-qws-r03.delacy.com ([172.23.65.103]) by qsmtp.delacy.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SIcsZ-0004jT-5Y; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 05:33:19 -0400 Received: from mshinwell by ldn-qws-r03.delacy.com with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SIcsY-0005f2-Gs; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 10:33:18 +0100 Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 10:33:18 +0100 From: Mark Shinwell To: Matthias Puech Cc: caml-list@inria.fr Message-ID: <20120413093318.GA11194@janestreet.com> References: <4F87EDFB.6090409@cs.unibo.it> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4F87EDFB.6090409@cs.unibo.it> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Validation-by: mshinwell@janestreet.com Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Printexc.register_printer without catch On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 11:12:27AM +0200, Matthias Puech wrote: > Is there a way to change printing of uncaught exceptions in the > toplevel and in (native/bytecode, 3.12) compiled code without > wrapping the whole code in a try ... with or in Printexc.catch? I don't believe so. However, I have nearly finished a patch to enable this, so the feature may appear soon if I can get sufficient buy-in from the other developers. Mark