Is this stack trace support different than what we have currently? (e.g. the one implemented with GHC.Stack and cost centers)
--- Ömer Sinan Ağacan http://osa1.net 2014-08-13 18:02 GMT+03:00 Johan Tibell <johan.tib...@gmail.com>: > Hi, > > How's the integration of DWARF support coming along? It's probably one of > the most important improvements to the runtime in quite some time since > unlocks *two* important features, namely > > * trustworthy profiling (using e.g. Linux perf events and other > low-overhead, code preserving, sampling profilers), and > * stack traces. > > The former is really important to move our core libraries performance up a > notch. Right now -prof is too invasive for it to be useful when evaluating > the hotspots in these libraries (which are already often heavily tuned). > > The latter one is really important for real life Haskell on the server, > where you can sometimes can get some crash that only happens once a day > under very specific conditions. Knowing where the crash happens is then > *very* useful. > > -- Johan > > > _______________________________________________ > ghc-devs mailing list > ghc-devs@haskell.org > http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs > _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs