On Nov 11, 2007 1:45 PM, Robert Klemme <shortcutter / googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 11.11.2007 22:22, Brian Takita wrote:
> > I must say hiding the backtrace with x levels is a major annoyance.
> > I know the "solution" is to "simply put begin/rescue around the
> > error", but thats asinine.
>
> Since when is proper error handling "asinine"?
I think you misunderstood me. To express this misunderstanding, I'll
repeat what you are saying according to what I'm saying.
"In ruby you should have a begin/rescue block around every line of your code".
I'm sure you are not proposing that as a good pattern, but I digress.

I find hiding the stack trace to be unproductive. Its one more step I
need to do. It also hides information from production errors, which is
not a good thing.
>
> > I noticed that the code that does this is deep in ruby's C implementation.
> > Has anybody made ruby show the entire backtrace? I guess I could on my
> > machine, but I'd rather not have to change the C code.
>
> Then just do it in Ruby code - you even know the implementation already.
>
> > Can this be resolved Ruby 1.9, if it is not already?
>
> I can only speculate about the reasons for the current implementation
> (for example, to not clutter logfiles with the default stack dump) but I
> find the grounds on which you request a change which potentially affects
> the whole community very weak.
I think a lot of people would agree with this. Anybody who has had a
production bug obfuscated by '... n levels ...' would agree with me.
Its simply not user friendly. It may be ruby core developer friendly,
but its not ruby developer friendly, imho.
If you like obfuscation, then go ahead and disagree with me.
>
>         robert
>
>