[racket] current backtrace implications of JIT

I've been unable to break JIT backtraces in our large legacy application 
under PLT 4.2.5.  This is great news, since the JIT should be a big win 
for us.  Thanks, Matthew and the rest of PLT.

Neil Van Dyke wrote at 06/27/2010 11:38 PM:
> Thanks, Matthew.  Sounds like I should experiment with my application 
> and try to break JIT backtraces with 4.2.5.  Hopefully they just work 
> for me (and in production), because the JIT would be a big win for us.
>
> Matthew Flatt wrote at 06/27/2010 11:23 PM:
>> The difference between JIT and non-JIT backtraces usually isn't so 
>> big. Assuming that it's still a problem (i.e., it wasn't on x86_64 
>> and long enough ago), then probably we need to fix something in the 
>> JIT backtrace implementation.

-- 
http://www.neilvandyke.org/