Thoughts on adding getElementClass() method to StackTraceElement?

Jeroen Frijters jeroen at
Mon Jun 17 06:06:29 UTC 2013

Nick Williams wrote:
> What if we also added a getStackFrames() method to Throwable? That would
> meet my needs but it would also satisfy what I'm observing is a desire
> to have a new API for this (StackFrame) instead of adding it to
> StackTraceElement. I'm very open to how it's implemented, as long as it
> satisfies my use case. :-)
> The stack trace of a Throwable can be "filled in" on demand when
> getStackTrace() is called the first time, so that the overhead isn't
> incurred when creating and throwing the exception. Presumably, we would
> need to do something similar with getStackFrames(), especially since
> calling it would be less common.
> Thoughts on this?

Yes that is reasonable, but I'd add a static method to StackFrame instead. Something like StackFrame[] capture(Throwable).


More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list