need a a way to iter symbols from BacktraceFrame

[gcxfd]

No description provided.

[rust-highfive]

Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @m-ou-se (or someone else) soon.

Please see the contribution instructions for more information.

[rust-log-analyzer]

The job x86_64-gnu-llvm-12 failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)

   Compiling addr2line v0.16.0
error: missing documentation for a struct field
   --> library/std/src/backtrace.rs:155:5
    |
155 |     pub symbols: Vec<BacktraceSymbol>,
    |
    |
    = note: `-D missing-docs` implied by `-D warnings`
error: missing documentation for a struct
   --> library/std/src/backtrace.rs:165:1
    |
165 | pub struct BacktraceSymbol {
165 | pub struct BacktraceSymbol {
    | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

error: missing documentation for a struct field
   --> library/std/src/backtrace.rs:166:5
    |
166 |     pub name: Option<Vec<u8>>,

error: missing documentation for a struct field
   --> library/std/src/backtrace.rs:167:5
    |
    |
167 |     pub filename: Option<BytesOrWide>,

error: missing documentation for a struct field
   --> library/std/src/backtrace.rs:168:5
    |
    |
168 |     pub lineno: Option<u32>,

error: missing documentation for a struct field
   --> library/std/src/backtrace.rs:169:5
    |
    |
169 |     pub colno: Option<u32>,

error: missing documentation for an enum
   --> library/std/src/backtrace.rs:172:1
    |
    |
172 | pub enum BytesOrWide {
    | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

error: missing documentation for a variant
   --> library/std/src/backtrace.rs:173:5
    |
173 |     Bytes(Vec<u8>),

error: missing documentation for a variant
   --> library/std/src/backtrace.rs:174:5
    |

[m-ou-se]

Thanks for your PR.

Unfortunately, we can't just make all these things pub directly, since (once the backtrace featuer is stabilized) that makes it impossible to change the fields.

The way information like this should be exposed by the BacktraceFrame type should be discussed on the tracking issue first, and could probably use a small RFC.