From: Martin Stromberg Message-Id: <199804020902.LAA20524@propus.lu.erisoft.se> Subject: Re: Auto-symified traceback To: eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il (Eli Zaretskii) Date: Thu, 2 Apr 1998 11:02:34 +0200 (MET DST) Cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com (DJGPP-WORKERS) In-Reply-To: from "Eli Zaretskii" at Apr 1, 98 11:17:37 am MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk > On Wed, 1 Apr 1998, George Foot wrote: > > > I think the average DOS user would be very annoyed at having large > > files dumped to disk. > > ``Large''? Come on, an average program seldom takes more than 20 stack > frames, which generates traceback that is a few KB long. That's a single > cluster on most modern disks. No. When I'm talking about core files, I mean real core files, which size equals the memory size of the program and some. That usually means at least 1 MB. > > IMHO proper core file support (if any) should > > be an optional extra, possibly enabled by the environment or the > > programmer. Unless GDB can read them I don't expect many people > > would be interested in it though. > > Reading them is not the problem. The real problem is how to recreate the > memory layout which was in effect when the program crashed. Charles once > explained that this might be very hard in some cases. Charles, could you > please elaborate? Well, I'm no expert on core files, but I think they _are_ the memory layout when the program crashes. Now if we decide to dump the printout to a file as well as to the screen, as in the original(?) idea, which I like a lot. Please, don't call it "core". That would be really confusing as a core file is what I tried to explain above, and this would hamper the efforts if real core file were to be generated in the future. Right, MartinS