Russ Cox

At least the proposal discussion will get more eyes on it. What are the options? Is it possible to write a crash dump that doesn't get collected and sent off?

It sounds like we are still waiting to find out what exactly is being proposed here. Does anyone know?

We are still waiting to find out exactly what is being proposed here. If we can't figure that out, it seems like this would be a likely decline.

Hi @alexbrainman, thanks for the information. This sounds like a very useful, important feature for users. I tried to read https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/wer/collecting-user-mode-dumps and am confused about the implications with sending data...

It sounds like if we make this change, then developers who have not edited the registry will not see any change at all. And developers who did edit the registry...

@aarzilli Thanks for the tutorial on "minidumps" vs "mini dumps". You said that "mini dumps" are recognized by Delve but basically useless because they don't have memory contents. What about...

OK, well if MiniDumpWriteDump works with Delve, then my previous complex conditional reduces to "the choice is clear: use MiniDumpWriteDump". Does anyone object to using MiniDumpWriteDump instead of the WER...

Retitled to what I believe we converged on. Any objections?

Based on the discussion above, this proposal seems like a **[likely accept](https://golang.org/s/proposal-status#likely-accept)**. — rsc for the proposal review group

It seems like it would make sense to start with first handling the cases that _don't_ require changes to language semantics, and then evaluate what's left.