Another question would be where do I read about Haskell-native stack unwinder. The issue and MR Ben referenced have descriptions, but the MR didn't touch anything inside `docs` which is a bit scary. Are there any good recourses to dive into it besides the source code in the MR?

Best, Artem

On Thu, Nov 18, 2021, 11:31 AM Chris Smith <cdsmith@gmail.com> wrote:

Just to satisfy my curiosity here, when talking about backtraces here, are you talking about a lexical call stack, or an execution stack?

On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 11:24 AM Richard Eisenberg <lists@richarde.dev> wrote:

On Nov 18, 2021, at 10:29 AM, Ben Gamari <ben@smart-cactus.org> wrote:

At this point, for backtrace support I would rather put my money is on a
native Haskell stack unwinder (such as Sven Tennie's work [3,4]). Not only
is it more portable but it is also more robust (whereas with DWARF any
single object lacking debug information would break unwinding), and is
significantly less costly since we know much more about the structure of
our stack than a DWARF unwinder would.

Interesting -- this is helpful to know. I had heard about DWARF support for some years and thought that it would deliver stack traces. Now I will look for other sources. All good -- I understand how this is hard! -- and nice to know about.

Thanks for the writeup, Ben.

Richard
_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
ghc-devs@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs

_______________________________________________
ghc-devs mailing list
ghc-devs@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs