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: Fixing Bugs (Was: A Suggestion for Release Testing)


On Thu, 2005-06-16 at 10:30 -0400, Scott Robert Ladd wrote:
> Aaron W. LaFramboise wrote:
> > Boosters, FreeBSD hackers, and I'm sure tons of others are calling this
> > the "Bicycle shed effect."
> > 
> > <http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/faq/misc.html#BIKESHED-PAINTING>
> 
> If I'm building a bicycle shed, I may want to talk with others who have
> done so in the past, learning from the experience and gaining their
> insights. Why did they use a certain type of construction? What sort of
> storage did they build in? What worked and didn't work for someone else
> who has already built a shed? What did they learn from their own work?
> Any shed I build will be better for such discussions.
> 
> GCC's floating-point support can be improved by considering what people
> want from their math in conjunction with the characteristics of
> different systems. Discussions herein have clarified and expanded my
> understanding of the issues.
> 
> > In all of the open source world I have seen, posting code is always better.
> 
> Better than what? Design? Analysis? Just because some people like to
> nitpick doesn't mean there shouldn't be forethought to our work.
> 
> Be that as it may, one must work within the presiding culture, and if
> design and analysis are frowned upon, it is directly to code that I will go.
Design and analysis is not frowned upon.
Endless design and analysis over minutae is.
Code and design can be revised.


> 
> ..Scott


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