This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

[Bug fortran/53379] [4.7/4.8 Regression] No backtrace generated for array bounds violation


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53379

--- Comment #4 from Janne Blomqvist <jb at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-05-18 14:32:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > AFAICS, this is an intentional change in behavior. When I proposed making
> > backtracing enabled by default, there was some objections to the initial patch
> > on the grounds that the backtracing was too aggressive.
> 
> I wonder whether one should add a more aggressive version of backtrace (which
> could be internally pass backtrace == 2), which covers this case. Ditto for
> some environment flag.

Well yes, but IMHO the best option would be to do the right thing by default,
making an option unnecessary. If anything, a bewildering array of options is an
usability issue.

For instance...

> I have to admit that the description of
> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gfortran/GFORTRAN_005fERROR_005fBACKTRACE.html is
> misleading. And the meaning and relation of it to
> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gfortran/GFORTRAN_005fSHOW_005fLOCUS.html is also
> unclear.

one wonders what is the purpose of GFORTRAN_SHOW_LOCUS. What value do we
provide by providing a means to NOT print out the filename/line information? I
think the answer is "none" and thus we should get rid of it, simplifying the
code and manual a tidy bit.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]