Ingo Weinhold <ingo_weinhold@xxxxxx> schrieb: > What is printed now is the address of the frame, the > return address (aka caller) it contains, and the name > of the function that return address resolves to. Aaaah, so the name column is supposed to belong to what the return address points at. Ok, then it is consistent, but I absolutely did not expect that :) I thought the name column was "what function's frame is this". Maybe a simple change that could be made to make it more clear is to just change the column heading text? Currently it says "frame ... caller ... <image>:function + offset". Maybe change the last column's title to something like "caller <image>:function + offset" or so? Greetings, Julian