Christian Mauduit wrote:
> ...
> Well, using lazy-catch and a handler with the line:
>
> (display-backtrace (make-stack #t) some-user-string-output-port)
>
> actually got me very close from solving my problem completely. The only
> point is that the stack I obtain contains many useless things (
Christian Mauduit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> mmm, OK I see, indeed using:
>
> (debug-enable 'debug)
> (debug-enable 'backtrace)
>
> gave me much more detailed output, thanks for the tip.
FWIW, I use this at the start of my Scheme script (which is also
loaded by a C program - very similar overa
Alan Grover a écrit :
> My comments are for Guile version 1.6.4.
>
> To get a backtrace, you want something that does the same thing as the
> --debug option. However:
> "Using the debugging evaluator will give you better error messages but
> it will slow down execution."
> So, you don't want it in
My comments are for Guile version 1.6.4.
To get a backtrace, you want something that does the same thing as the
--debug option. However:
"Using the debugging evaluator will give you better error messages but
it will slow down execution."
So, you don't want it in production-code.
I believe this wi
Hello,
I'm currently coding a game using scheme as a scripting language. The
main program is a C program which first exports C functions to scheme
and then calls a scheme script. This scheme script is responsible for
all game logic, interaction, control, whatever, and the C functions are
low-level
