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 with formal testing docs

From: Rask Ingemann Lambertsen <rask at sygehus dot dk>
To: Ben Elliston <bje at au1 dot ibm dot com>
Cc: Manuel López-Ibáñez <lopezibanez at gmail dot com>, åé <kevylong at gmail dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2007 10:21:09 +0200
Subject: Re: GCC with formal testing docs
References: <11e0204a0707232342x1213bee5g5b3631415a8e94f3@mail.gmail.com> <6c33472e0707240248j7d5a6802icf17ab0bbd3cc24e@mail.gmail.com> <1185337766.409.0.camel@localhost>

On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 02:29:26PM +1000, Ben Elliston wrote:
> 
> If you build the compiler with coverage instrumentation and run the
> testsuite, you might get a shock.  It's not as well tested as you might
> think.

   For example, several targets would build/bootstrap and regtest fine with
reload's find_valid_class() implemented as gcc_abort(). And guess what,
there seems to be an off-by-one error in the outer loop exit condition.

-- 
Rask Ingemann Lambertsen

Follow-Ups:
- Re: GCC with formal testing docs
  - From: Ian Lance Taylor

References:
- GCC with formal testing docs
  - From: 张飞
- Re: GCC with formal testing docs
  - From: Manuel López-Ibáñez
- Re: GCC with formal testing docs
  - From: Ben Elliston

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