On 07/05/21 4:26 pm, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 05/05/21 12:33 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 24/04/21 15:46 +0200, François Dumont via Libstdc++ wrote:
Hi
Here is the patch to add backtrace generation on _GLIBCXX_DEBUG
assertions thanks to libbacktrace.
Ville pointed out that we'll ne
On 05/05/21 12:33 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 24/04/21 15:46 +0200, François Dumont via Libstdc++ wrote:
Hi
Here is the patch to add backtrace generation on _GLIBCXX_DEBUG
assertions thanks to libbacktrace.
Ville pointed out that we'll need to use libbacktrace for
std::stacktrace
On 24/04/21 15:46 +0200, François Dumont via Libstdc++ wrote:
Hi
Here is the patch to add backtrace generation on _GLIBCXX_DEBUG
assertions thanks to libbacktrace.
In addition to this integration I am also improving the generation
of the assertion message thanks to the "%.*s" printf
On 04/05/21 08:03 +0200, François Dumont wrote:
On 03/05/21 11:06 pm, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 03/05/21 22:17 +0200, François Dumont via Libstdc++ wrote:
Is it too early to consider this patch ? Or just lack of time ?
I haven't had time to review it yet, but my general feeling hasn't
changed
On 03/05/21 11:06 pm, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 03/05/21 22:17 +0200, François Dumont via Libstdc++ wrote:
Is it too early to consider this patch ? Or just lack of time ?
I haven't had time to review it yet, but my general feeling hasn't
changed. I still don't like the idea of executing additi
On 03/05/21 22:17 +0200, François Dumont via Libstdc++ wrote:
Is it too early to consider this patch ? Or just lack of time ?
I haven't had time to review it yet, but my general feeling hasn't
changed. I still don't like the idea of executing additional code
after undefined behaviour is detecte
Is it too early to consider this patch ? Or just lack of time ?
Considering the patch I would really appreciate that, if validated, it
gets in as early as possible in next release.
Thanks,
François
On 24/04/21 3:46 pm, François Dumont wrote:
Hi
Here is the patch to add backtrace generat