This is the mail archive of the 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: Overwhelmed by GCC frustration

On 7/31/2017 11:12 AM, Oleg Endo wrote:
On Mon, 2017-07-31 at 15:25 +0200, Georg-Johann Lay wrote:
Around 2010, someone who used a code snipped that I published in
a wiki, reported that the code didn't work and hang in an
endless loop.  Soon I found out that it was due to some GCC
problem, and I got interested in fixing the compiler so that
it worked with my code.

1 1/2 years later, in 2011, [...]

I could probably write a similar rant.  This is the life of a "minority
target programmer".  Most development efforts are being done with
primary targets in mind.  And as a result, most changes are being
tested only on such targets.

To improve the situation, we'd need a lot more target specific tests
which test for those regressions that you have mentioned.  Then of
course somebody has to run all those tests on all those various
targets.  I think that's the biggest problem.  But still, with a test
case at hand, it's much easier to talk to people who have silently
introduced a regression on some "other" targets.  Most of the time they
just don't know.

Long ago, there was a code size regression tester for at least
ARM. Is that still around?

RTEMS also has a number of "minority targets" and we have seen
breakages take a long time to get fixed. Most of our targets
use gcc 7.1.0 but two have to use 4.9.x, one uses 4.8.3, and
one is at 6.3.0.



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