Mismatch between comment and actual code about when paths are made relative

[bjorn3]

The comment says it is done only for the short format:

backtrace-rs/src/capture.rs

Lines 493 to 496 in 57c7529

	// When printing paths we try to strip the cwd if it exists, otherwise
	// we just print the path as-is. Note that we also only do this for the
	// short format, because if it's full we presumably want to print
	// everything.

Which matches the printing code in libstd. The actual code however does it for the full format:

backtrace-rs/src/capture.rs

Lines 501 to 507 in 57c7529

	if style == PrintFmt::Full {
	if let Ok(cwd) = &cwd {
	if let Ok(suffix) = path.strip_prefix(cwd) {
	return fmt::Display::fmt(&suffix.display(), fmt);
	}
	}
	}

[philipc]

Looks like a regression in #526 which did a few changes to impl fmt::Debug for Backtrace which look unrelated to the issue the PR was addressing.

[philipc]

Fixed by #726. But the removal of actual_start_index in #526 still looks wrong to me (it now always skips frames, even for the "full" display).

[workingjubilee]

Yeah, sorry about the slipup there. I'll take a closer look at the missing index problem before closing this.

[oaksprout]

Would you want this one done? — A prior refactor removed frame-skipping logic that should only apply to Backtrace's short display format, but it now also incorrectly skips frames in the full format, per the maintainer's own follow-up comment after a partial fix landed. If yes, we'll do it and open a PR; if not, say so (or just ignore this) and we won't touch it.

How it works: an AI agent does the work against your write-up; a human reviews it, submits it, and answers the review. You keep full control — nothing lands unless you merge it.

We're testing whether work offered this way is useful to maintainers — a blunt "no" is as helpful as a yes.

[bjorn3]

No thank you.