On 08/03/2017 19:59, mbartosik via Boost wrote:
I see that Boost.stacktrace is up for review March 17, 2017 - March 26, 2017
I've got some broad feedback. I'm in a race to comment before I go on vacation on Friday, so I'm sorry if I've missed something or misunderstood. I will try and follow the thread while on vacation - but not sure that will happen. [snip]
Thanks for the pre-review review. I don't want to disturb the Safe Numerics review, but here is the changelog in Stacktrace since the last review: * Reimplemented boost::stacktrace::basic_stacktrace class to accept allocators and to have a small size * Added outputting of the path to the binary object into the stacktrace, when source location is not available * Allowed to use `libbacktrace` - a defacto standard for GCC/CLANG backtracing that does not fork and has a permissive license * Optimized stacktrace and frames ostreaming * Removed backends and made the default tracing to have only platform basic functionality. Added macros to enable additional functionality. * Fixed (theoretically) MinGW compilation * Added functions for async-safe dumping into memory or descriptor * Changed signal handling example to be async-signal-safe * Allowed users to choose how many frames to skip during stack capture * Removed `boost::stacktrace::stacktrace` functions and other internals from printed stack traces * Updated docs: * examples now use Boost.Exception * removed all the references to "backend" * reduced macro count * "Build, Macros and Backends" section was rewritten and became "Configuration and Build" * added note that library is C++03 * added examples on storing traces into shared memory * updated all the human readable dumps Some of these address your concerns in your review, however quite a few points in your review have not been addressed, and some look quite important. Perhaps Antony might consider these before the 17th? Niall -- ned Productions Limited Consulting http://www.nedproductions.biz/ http://ie.linkedin.com/in/nialldouglas/