Re: Stack with a tail call is missing function names?

[Paul K <paulclinger@...>]

Yes, that would work, but I'm developing a stack viewer, which should
work with any type of stack content and can only do it post factum
(when the call is already made and without any code modifications). I
added a check for this case, but wasn't sure if this is the best that
can be done in this case.

Paul.

On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 5:10 PM, Andrew Starks <andrew.starks@trms.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 7:03 PM, Andrew Starks <andrew.starks@trms.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 6:26 PM, Paul K <paulclinger@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Cosmin,
>>>
>>> Yes, that's my case.
>>>
>>> Does anyone know if this is a known limitation that is not going to be fixed?
>>>
>>> Paul.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Cosmin Apreutesei
>>> <cosmin.apreutesei@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> maybe this answer could help?
>>>> http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2012-03/msg00662.html
>>>>
>>>
>
> If you're just debugging and don't need the tail call, you can
> surround your function call with (f()), and them remove it when you're
> done debugging... unless you're overflowing the stack and that's why
> you're doing it that way. :)
>
>
> Of course +0 works too...
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Andrew Starks
>