New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Tracking issue for RFC 2504, "Fix the Error trait" #53487

Open
Centril opened this Issue Aug 19, 2018 · 7 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
5 participants
@Centril
Copy link
Contributor

Centril commented Aug 19, 2018

This is a tracking issue for the RFC "Fix the Error trait" (rust-lang/rfcs#2504).

Steps:

Unresolved questions:

  • The choice to implement nullability internal to backtrace may prove to be a mistake: during the period when backtrace APIs are only available on nightly, we will gain more experience and possible change backtrace's constructors to return an Option<Backtrace> instead.
@Laaas

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

Laaas commented Sep 26, 2018

What parts haven't been implemented?

@withoutboats

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

withoutboats commented Sep 26, 2018

I've updated the tracking issue to reflect that, but right now the source method has been implemented, but the backtrace related APIs have not been implemented

@Laaas

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

Laaas commented Sep 26, 2018

Perhaps I could try implementing this, is it OK to just use the backtrace crate?

@alexcrichton

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

alexcrichton commented Oct 2, 2018

Implementing backtraces in the standard library will probably not use the backtrace crate but rather the backtrace API that's already in the standard library for RUST_BACKTRACE. We can perhaps unify these implementations in the long run, but for now it's infeasible to do so.

The current platform-independent backtrace code lives here, mostly in the _print function. Implementing the API defined in the RFC will likely involve reusing these interfaces to define a struct which carries along the relevant information.

@Laaas if you'd like to implement this please feel free! Also feel free to reach out with any questions.

@Laaas

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

Laaas commented Oct 2, 2018

Thanks! Will definitely try implementing it.

@frewsxcv

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

frewsxcv commented Nov 22, 2018

Thanks! Will definitely try implementing it.

@Laaas Did you make any progress? Need any help?

@Laaas

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

Laaas commented Nov 22, 2018

@frewsxcv Actually not!

I haven't really looked at it much, so if you want to work on it, go ahead!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment