GHCi debugger status

[Peter Hercek]

Simon Marlow wrote:
> A similar argument applies to keeping the dynamic stack.  The problem 
> with the dynamic stack is that it doesn't look much like you expect, due 
> to tail-calls.

Do you think people expect the tail-calls to add a stack frame to the 
dynamic stack or is there something more complicated?
I would expect a tail-call to overwrite the last stack frame on the 
dynamic stack - just like imperative loops, which is what they 
correspond to. Dynamic stack should correspond closely to the stack 
which overflows when we get the "stack overflow exception". That is what 
I would expect. If somebody wants the history of tail-calls he can check 
the trace information, which should not be a problem especially if some 
filtering (like tracelocal) is possible.

Peter.