Re: Was: Debug optimized code; Now: How many compiler bugs have you seen?

Nils <n.pipenbrinck@cubic.org>
Thu, 25 Sep 2008 00:30:18 +0200

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
Debug optimized code linuxkaffee_@_gmx.net (Stephan Ceram) (2008-09-16)
Re: Debug optimized code gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2008-09-20)
Re: Debug optimized code sh006d3592@blueyonder.co.uk (Stephen Horne) (2008-09-22)
Re: Debug optimized code gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2008-09-23)
Was: Debug optimized code; Now: How many compiler bugs have you seen? cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com (Chris F Clark) (2008-09-24)
Re: Was: Debug optimized code; Now: How many compiler bugs have you se ArarghMail809@Arargh.com (2008-09-24)
Re: Was: Debug optimized code; Now: How many compiler bugs have you se n.pipenbrinck@cubic.org (Nils) (2008-09-25)
Re: Was: Debug optimized code; Now: How many compiler bugs have you se sh006d3592@blueyonder.co.uk (Stephen Horne) (2008-09-25)
Re: Was: Debug optimized code; Now: How many compiler bugs have you se gneuner2@comcast.net (George Neuner) (2008-09-25)
Re: Was: Debug optimized code; Now: How many compiler bugs have you se dot@dotat.at (Tony Finch) (2008-09-25)
Re: Was: Debug optimized code; Now: How many compiler bugs have you se cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com (Chris F Clark) (2008-09-25)
Re: Was: Debug optimized code; Now: How many compiler bugs have you se jfc@mit.edu (2008-10-02)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: Nils <n.pipenbrinck@cubic.org>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 00:30:18 +0200
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 08-09-076 08-09-105 08-09-110 08-09-115 08-09-119
Keywords: errors
Posted-Date: 25 Sep 2008 11:42:25 EDT

Chris F Clark wrote:
> So, I wonder, how many of you have experienced real compiler bugs,
> that you could verify was the compilers fault and not just "mysterious
> behavior" that could be fixed by changing the optimizer/debugger
> level?


I had my share with the Metrowerks C-Compiler for the DreamCast
game-consone (SH4).


The versions I've worked with had lots of problems with the difference
between signed and unsigned. That manifested in very obscure and hard to
find bugs.


Here is my favorite: For switch-statements with sparse cases the
compiler built a binary search tree. Unfortunately the code-generator
prepared the code for unsigned values and used signed branches. That
worked as long as you never used negative values or unsigned values with
the MSB set.


I found more than a dozen of related bugs.


I still feel bad for the development guys at mwerks. For some reason we
always found the bugs near the end of the week, and we always got a
patch on monday. I know that I ruined more than one weekend.



Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.