Re: [fortran, patch] Allow displaying backtraces from user code

[Janus Weil <janus at gcc dot gnu dot org>]

>> There are two possibilities:
>> a) Making _gfortran_show_backtrace accessible from the outside (via manual
>> C binding from Fortran)
>> b) Adding a new intrinsic
>>
>
> I would vote for b), as it gets documented then.
> It is enough useful for a wide range of programmers to deserve
> an intrinsic of its own, IMHO.
> And always directly available, no need of module convolutions.

As noted before, I also prefer b).


> Name: simply show_backtrace ?
> This would be a self-explaining name, the odd "QQ" in
> tracebackqq is just this, odd.
> And why call it traceback when it is actually a backtrace ;-)

Adopting the name from Intel would have the advantage of compatibility
between ifort and gfortran. However, since other vendors have
different names, compatibility between several compilers in this
non-standard function will not be realized. Moreover I agree that the
'QQ' part is odd (I never understood what it is supposed to mean).

Therefore I would also vote for something like "show_backtrace" (or
simply "backtrace"?).

Cheers,
Janus