This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH] Fix PR debug/19327
> Just FYI, it didn't introduce the regression.
> That implies the patch is broken.
Not in my mind. AFAICT your patch is fine, but it wasn't tested with stabs,
and caused a testcase that used to pass to fail; so we certainly regressed.
> In terms of fixing it, yes, there is no difference between a latent bug
> and a regression, but you make it seem like the patch's code was broken,
> which it isn't.
I usually quote patches that introduced regressions I'm fixing to help the
reviewer understand where the bug comes from and why it popped up.
I'm not sure you really need it, but I hereby grant you permission to do the
same with my patches. :-)