Hi - On 10/30/15, 12:45 PM, "Hui Zhang" <wayne.huizh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hello, Michael > > >Okay....that makes a lot more sense now > > >In my case, as your example, I need a nice stack trace when a sample fell >on that "writeln", but now it'll give me something like this (assume file >is user.chpl, forall is on line > #1): > >wrap_coforall_fn (user.chpl : 1) -> coforall_fn (ChapelRange.chpl: 2) -> >writeln (..) > >I expected it to be something like: > >wrap_coforall_fn(user.chpl: 1) -> coforall_fn(user.chpl: 2) -> writeln(..) > > >So if the filename is internal modules, then it'll be difficult for me >to transfer data along the stack since my previous analysis only >concerns about user code... I don't think it's philosophically wrong for the compiler to include these internal module line numbers. Can you arrange for your tool to ignore them somehow? > > >Another question: why the line# of the frame I got is "correct"(right >line# in the user code, here '2') when the file/module is internal module >? That just looks like a bug to me. -michael ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Chapel-developers mailing list Chapel-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/chapel-developers
