Issue 727b - A second option

[jmjatlanta]

This is another option for adding stacktrace to bitshares. Instead of porting fc/stacktrace from steem, I pulled stacktrace from the 1.65 version of boost.

Boost has more lines of code, but code quality appears better, and is probably tested to a higher degree (more eyes on it).

[pmconrad]

Much better than #23 IMO.
Question: is it important for us to have stacktraces for pre-1.65 boost?
I think it isn't, and therefore I'd propose to not copy the old boost code but instead rebase on #36 and detect boost version at compile-time and replace the stacktrace stuff with NOPs if boost is too old.

[jmjatlanta]

Question: is it important for us to have stacktraces for pre-1.65 boost?
I think it isn't,

I agree. If everyone else does, I'll rebase on the Boost 1.66 stuff and a skip the stacktrace logic pre boost 1.65.

[pmconrad]

@abitmore ?

[abitmore]

Question: is it important for us to have stacktraces for pre-1.65 boost?
I think it isn't,

I agree. If everyone else does, I'll rebase on the Boost 1.66 stuff and a skip the stacktrace logic pre boost 1.65.

I agree.

[jmjatlanta]

The rebase included commits that muddy the waters. I have created a new PR.
#38