[racket] Exception Stack Trace Troubles

I should have also mentioned that using -j to disable the JIT (as Robby
suggested) should also give you context independent of the platform or
the way that Racket is compiled.

At Wed, 27 Jun 2012 20:28:53 -0600, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> I wonder whether the problem could be related to compilation options.
> Did you compile your own executable? If so, what flags were given to
> `configure' and/or the C compiler?
> 
> On x86_64 Linux, Racket uses DWARF information to walk parts of the
> runtime stack. It occurs to me that if you use gcc without the `-g'
> flag, then DWARF information isn't included, so Racket can't understand
> the stack. There may be other options that confuse the stack walker.
> 
> (Errortrace and DrRacket both add their own context tracking
> independent of the way that Racket is compiled, but that context is not
> reflected via `continuation-mark-set->context'.)
> 
> At Tue, 26 Jun 2012 16:37:13 +0900, Chad Albers wrote:
> > I'm using Debian Linux.
> > --
> > Chad Albers
> > 
> > 
> > On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 10:08 PM, Matthew Flatt <mflatt at cs.utah.edu> wrote:
> > > What platform are you using?
> > >
> > > If it's Win64, the problem is likely Racket's weak support for getting
> > > a backtrace on that platform (when the JIT is enabled).
> > >
> > > At Sun, 24 Jun 2012 22:01:02 +0900, Chad Albers wrote:
> > >> Hi Eli,
> > >>
> > >> Thanks for you help.  Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to work.  I
> > >> literally cut the code and pasted in a rkt file with #lang racket at
> > >> the top.  I ran it with the racket CLI, and received: '()
> > >>
> > >> Should I be invoking the CLI with some option?  Any other ideas?
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Chad
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Eli Barzilay <eli at barzilay.org> wrote:
> > >> > A few minutes ago, Chad Albers wrote:
> > >> >> Hi,
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Is there some sort of 'secret' to acquiring the stack trace of an
> > >> >> exception?  It is my understanding that when an exception is raised
> > >> >> with the 'error' procedure in creates a exn:fail structure that has
> > >> >> a message field and a continuation-marks field.  Presumably the
> > >> >> stack trace is in the continuation-marks field.  To actually get the
> > >> >> stack trace I need to call the following:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> (continuation-mark-set->context (exn-continuation-marks exception))
> > >> >
> > >> > This should work -- for example, I see a stack trace with:
> > >> >
> > >> >  (with-handlers ([void (λ (e) (continuation-mark-set->context
> > >> >                                (exn-continuation-marks e)))])
> > >> >    (+ 1 "two"))
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >> However, whenever I call this, it yields an empty list: () - Not a
> > >> >> stack trace.
> > >> >
> > >> > That can happen from running code in threads which start from an empty
> > >> > context.  For example, doing the above in a thread:
> > >> >
> > >> >  (thread (λ () (printf "~s\n" ...same...)))
> > >> >
> > >> > shows an empty trace.
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> >          ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
> > >> >                    http://barzilay.org/                   Maze is Life!
> > >>
> > >> ____________________
> > >>   Racket Users list:
> > >>   http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
> 
> ____________________
>   Racket Users list:
>   http://lists.racket-lang.org/users