This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: GCC 4.2.0 Status Report (2007-02-19)


On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 11:33:39AM -0500, Kaveh R. GHAZI wrote:
> My tolerance is pretty low.  I'm relying on the fact that the bug occurs
> rarely in real code.  I'm trying to reconcile your statement about
> customer feedback with Daniel B's claim here:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-02/msg00476.html
> 
> He said:
> "I'm still of the opinion that even though you can write relatively simple
> testcases for them, they are actually pretty rare.  In most of the bugs,
> it is in fact, the absence of any real code (or local variables in one
> case) that triggers the bad result. Anything more complex and we get the
> right answer."

They're different sides of the same coin; they don't disagree, though
a judgement is indeed required.

In support of what Danny B. wrote, in at least one case we were unable
to meaningfully reproduce the testcase.  This stuff is not easy to
trigger.  But if you do, it's quite unpleasant - both for the user,
and for the poor compiler developer who has to figure out what
happened.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]