On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 10:00:16AM +0100, Andrey Hristov wrote:
> Hmmm,
> looks I was kinda fooled by some script a month ago. I was suprised that
> with debug_print_backtrace() I was able to see the arguments of the stack
> since I haven't seen the same done by debug_backtrace(). But few minutes
Andi Gutmans wrote:
What else does debug_print_backtrace() include? If the info is more
maybe we should change debug_backtrace()?
In any case, in general I don't have a problem to do this. Might be
nicer if we could do it without output buffering though but I haven't
looked at the code to see ho
On Fri, 19 Mar 2004, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> What else does debug_print_backtrace() include? If the info is more maybe
> we should change debug_backtrace()?
> In any case, in general I don't have a problem to do this. Might be nicer
> if we could do it without output buffering though but I haven't l
What else does debug_print_backtrace() include? If the info is more maybe
we should change debug_backtrace()?
In any case, in general I don't have a problem to do this. Might be nicer
if we could do it without output buffering though but I haven't looked at
the code to see how hard that would be
