This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Bug reduction instructions, draft 2
- From: <tm_gccmail at mail dot kloo dot net>
- To: Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth at ticam dot utexas dot edu>
- Cc: Gerald Pfeifer <pfeifer at dbai dot tuwien dot ac dot at>,gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, Janis Johnson <janis187 at us dot ibm dot com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2003 12:19:26 -0800 (PST)
- Subject: Re: Bug reduction instructions, draft 2
On Tue, 14 Jan 2003, Wolfgang Bangerth wrote:
>
> On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 tm_gccmail@mail.kloo.net wrote:
> > [...]
>
> Thanks for your suggestions. Janis also has had a lot of changes, which
> I'll use for a next draft.
>
>
> > > +<h2>Brute force approach</h2>
> >
> > This whole "Brute force approach" section should be completely rewritten.
> > It is excessively wordy. You should merely describe it as an iterative
> > process of removing various pieces of code and retesting to verify the
> > original behavior is replicated.
>
> I think that we should explain _why_ some steps should be done. The
> document is not for people who frequently do this anyway, they know all
> this. The intention was to have something that a bug reporter wants to
> read if he wants to help more with his report.
No, I meant you could reduce it in size by describing it as an iterative
process of removing code, then describe what bits of code should be
removed.
> > If you use "gcc -E -P" there will be no preprocessor directives
> > in the generated uotput file.
>
> True, but our bug reporting instructions say that people should generate
> preprocessed output with -save-temps, so I did not want to deviate from
> this path.
Ah, ok.