Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed3a.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.028 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.94; '*S*': 0.00; 'preferred.': 0.05; 'debugging': 0.07; 'thread': 0.14; 'conditional': 0.16; 'fingerprint:': 0.16; 'fruit': 0.16; 'gpg': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'wed,': 0.18; 'putting': 0.22; 'tests': 0.22; 'id:': 0.23; 'header :User-Agent:1': 0.23; "i've": 0.25; 'least': 0.26; 'header:In- Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'function': 0.29; 'chris': 0.29; "skip:' 10": 0.31; 'occurs': 0.31; 'writes:': 0.31; 'problem': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'subject:?': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'unit': 0.37; 'two': 0.37; 'being': 0.38; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.38; 'issue': 0.38; 'pm,': 0.38; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'received:org': 0.40; 'called': 0.40; 'high': 0.63; 'flies': 0.84; 'together,': 0.84; 'encrypted': 0.91 From: Nikolaus Rath To: python-list@python.org Subject: Re: Missing stack frames? References: <87fvjlv22v.fsf@vostro.rath.org> Mail-Copies-To: never Mail-Followup-To: python-list@python.org Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 10:38:41 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Chris Angelico's message of "Wed, 4 Jun 2014 12:35:36 +1000") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 24 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1401903532 news.xs4all.nl 2904 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:53218 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:72647 Chris Angelico writes: > On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 12:30 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote: >> I've instrumented one of my unit tests with a conditional >> 'pdb.set_trace' in some circumstances (specifically, when a function is >> called by a thread other than MainThread). > > I think the likelihood of this being an issue with interactive > debugging and threads is sufficiently high that you should avoid > putting the two together, at least until you can verify that the same > problem occurs without that combination. Is there a way to produce a stacktrace without using the interactive debugger? Best, -Nikolaus --=20 GPG encrypted emails preferred. Key id: 0xD113FCAC3C4E599F Fingerprint: ED31 791B 2C5C 1613 AF38 8B8A D113 FCAC 3C4E 599F =C2=BBTime flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.=C2= =AB