2011/1/28 <michael.vancann...@wisa.be>: > > > On Fri, 28 Jan 2011, cobines wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> Can someone comment on this issue? It still exists in current FPC >> trunk. It seems the patch posted there fixes the issue. Is the patch >> not good? > > The patch is good, but I suspect a more general patch is needed.
Meaning there is an issue with "raise at addr" but not with "raise" or "raise at addr, frame" ? There are other places in RTL that use "raise at addr, frame" so maybe these few places which use "raise at addr" can be changed, at least as a temporary solution, until a more general patch, as you say, is produced. > >> >> Why is "raise ... at" needed instead of just "raise" ? > > Because if you use 'Raise', then the .error method shows up in the stack > dump, when the real location is actually in the frame above. It's not > actually required, but it is nicer to have the real location as the first > frame in your stack list. > OK, I see now, thanks. I looked at fpc_PushExceptObj and it uses frame pointers to create backtrace, so is there a point in calling "raise at addr" with frameptr=nil? Is sometimes frame pointer not possible to retrieve that such construct is allowed? -- cobines _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
