From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Received: (qmail 23320 invoked from network); 10 Mar 2023 17:42:27 -0000
Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (50.116.15.146)
  by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 10 Mar 2023 17:42:27 -0000
Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1])
	by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68A5941585;
	Sat, 11 Mar 2023 03:42:25 +1000 (AEST)
Received: from mcvoy.com (mcvoy.com [192.169.23.250])
	by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0252841581
	for <coff@tuhs.org>; Sat, 11 Mar 2023 03:42:23 +1000 (AEST)
Received: by mcvoy.com (Postfix, from userid 3546)
	id 9139B35E93A; Fri, 10 Mar 2023 09:42:22 -0800 (PST)
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 09:42:22 -0800
From: Larry McVoy <lm@mcvoy.com>
To: Bakul Shah <bakul@iitbombay.org>
Message-ID: <20230310174222.GB9225@mcvoy.com>
References: <zQ8vnI_R8uVwIaiBNo8FIH-OWMoES4VHfnxnnCNISkbFkJcpenXi4H75Z7zFStfclQAue8mixqjL6rWIMBAYRi3bbeGdv0SQUHA9NbQAb44=@protonmail.com>
 <69248852-1701-4938-8A4D-3B27F3018E83@iitbombay.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <69248852-1701-4938-8A4D-3B27F3018E83@iitbombay.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Message-ID-Hash: FCC5527D2NL2MRUXRA2NGMRB7NMLZWEI
X-Message-ID-Hash: FCC5527D2NL2MRUXRA2NGMRB7NMLZWEI
X-MailFrom: lm@mcvoy.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: segaloco <segaloco@protonmail.com>, coff@tuhs.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.6b1
Precedence: list
Subject: [COFF] Re: [TUHS] Re: Conditions, AKA exceptions. (Was: I can't drive 55: "GOTO considered harmful" 55th anniversary)
List-Id: Computer Old Farts Forum <coff.tuhs.org>
Archived-At: <https://www.tuhs.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/coff@tuhs.org/message/FCC5527D2NL2MRUXRA2NGMRB7NMLZWEI/>
List-Archive: <https://www.tuhs.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/coff@tuhs.org/>
List-Help: <mailto:coff-request@tuhs.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:coff-owner@tuhs.org>
List-Post: <mailto:coff@tuhs.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:coff-join@tuhs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:coff-leave@tuhs.org>

On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 09:35:44AM -0800, Bakul Shah wrote:
> During development the runtime should simply invoke a debugger in this case. This should be perfectly doable but for some reason it is considered acceptable to crash a program! I don???t want to run a program *under a debugger* but want it invoked at the right time!

Indeed.

void
gdb_backtrace(void)
{
        FILE    *f;
        char    *cmd;

        unless (getenv("_BK_BACKTRACE")) return;
        unless ((f = efopen("BK_TTYPRINTF")) ||
            (f = fopen(DEV_TTY, "w"))) {
                f = stderr;
        }
        cmd = aprintf("gdb -batch -ex backtrace '%s/bk' %u 1>&%d 2>&%d",
            bin, getpid(), fileno(f), fileno(f));

        system(cmd);
        free(cmd);
        if (f != stderr) fclose(f);
}