[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Rant on ...

From: Drew Adams
Subject: RE: Rant on ...
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 19:50:56 -0800 (PST)

> > Getting rid of the bytecode is important for communicating by
> > copying/pasting backtrace text.  You cannot copy/paste it all
> > when some of it is bytecode - you only get the first part of it
> > - up to some binary character - and the rest is truncated away.
> I've been thinking we could keep the bytecode, but just print it
> with the non-text characters escaped.

That would be OK too.  But better might be to (1) remove/elide the
stuff that is meaningless and (2) keep the embedded readable chars.
There is little sense, I think, in escaping junk that is unreadable,
just to (presumably) avoid any loss of info.

For me, it's just about communicating a human-readable backtrace,
but perhaps (?) there is also a need, for some people, to be able
to communicate the whole, real deal, and enable someone else to
restore the escaped byte code from it.  I don't need that.

> I'll reopen and follow up on the bug thread tomorrow.

Good to hear.  Thx.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]