This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCC 8 released but not successful ?
- From: Xi Ruoyao <ryxi at stu dot xidian dot edu dot cn>
- To: Dennis Clarke <dclarke at blastwave dot org>
- Cc: gcc-help <gcc-help at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Fri, 04 May 2018 22:46:23 +0800
- Subject: Re: GCC 8 released but not successful ?
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On 2018-04-29 14:47 -0400, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> I think we still need a human to look over the results and then
> determine to what degree the results are reasonably clean or just
> another nightmare of fails in gfortran and g++ and go etc etc.
> Example of a nightmare :
> Here is a release thing of beauty :
> I know that the testsuite for Perl tends to kick out a few lines at the
> bottom that claim 99.8% passed or similar. The testsuite in gcc just
> dumps out numbers that may leave one to always ask "why would anyone
> trust this thing?"
> === g++ Summary ===
> # of expected passes 105237
> # of unexpected failures 105
> # of expected failures 395
> # of unsupported tests 4600
> So what is that ? Good? Disaster? About 105 unexpected failures
> means C++ can not be trusted on this platform? I am never too sure as
> there here never been a perfect result and there may never be. An
> automated test platform would have to report the above as :
> rhel74$ echo "4k 1 105 105237 105 395 4600 +++ / - 100 * pq" | dc
> So pretty darn clean right? However a 0.09% failure in the wrong place
> would be a catastrophic failure for code that needs to run inside a
> Medtronic heart implant or some flight control systems or turbo fan fuel
> pump sensors. Those things are most likely hand coded assembly and
> tested to death. No pun intended.
AFAIK on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, I think we can only ignore some FAILs in
gcc.dg/guality. They use GDB and the result (debugger output) tends to
be wrong with optimization. Other tests should not FAIL.
> Anyways, I was just wondering where GCC 8.1 is and it seems to be RSN.
My result was sent:
I don't have platforms other than x86_64-pc-linux-gnu (though I may buy
a mips64 in 2019).
And you can search for "8.1.0" here:
Xi Ruoyao <email@example.com>
School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University