Re: compiler bugs

Jeremy J Starcher <r3jjs@yahoo.com>
Wed, 29 Apr 2009 17:16:20 GMT

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[10 earlier articles]
Re: compiler bugs georgeps@xmission.com (George Peter Staplin) (2009-04-28)
Re: compiler bugs marcov@stack.nl (Marco van de Voort) (2009-04-29)
Re: compiler bugs torbenm@pc-003.diku.dk (2009-04-29)
Re: compiler bugs dot@dotat.at (Tony Finch) (2009-04-29)
Re: compiler bugs derek@knosof.co.uk (Derek M. Jones) (2009-04-29)
Re: compiler bugs gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2009-04-29)
Re: compiler bugs r3jjs@yahoo.com (Jeremy J Starcher) (2009-04-29)
Re: compiler bugs walter@bytecraft.com (Walter Banks) (2009-04-30)
Re: compiler bugs cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com (Chris F Clark) (2009-04-30)
Re: compiler bugs anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (2009-05-01)
Re: compiler bugs gene.ressler@gmail.com (Gene) (2009-05-01)
Re: compiler bugs cdg@nullstone.com (Christopher Glaeser) (2009-05-04)
Re: compiler bugs anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (2009-05-05)
[7 later articles]
| List of all articles for this month |
From: Jeremy J Starcher <r3jjs@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 17:16:20 GMT
Organization: at&t http://my.att.net/
References: 09-04-077 09-04-081
Keywords: errors
Posted-Date: 01 May 2009 19:17:54 EDT

On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 12:57:33 -0700, Quinn Tyler Jackson wrote:


> Jeremy J Starcher said:
>
>> That said, when I come across a problem, I always assume the bug is in
>> my code until I can provide a test case that clearly demonstrates that
>> the compiler itself is at fault.
>
> I can count on one hand the number of genuine compiler bugs I've been
> able to isolate and reproduce well enough to report as official bugs.
> (Even the so-called optimization bugs turned out to be my violation of
> some contract with the compiler, such as aliasing when I oughtn't have.)


For large "well-known" compilers, that is true for me as well.


Back when I was using ZBASIC (A cross-platform compiled basic) I had the
development team on speed-dial and they ended up using our test suite
before sending us anything.




> That said, I couldn't count in all the bits of a gigabyte how many times
> I've heard programmers (including myself) say: "The *($@&&^ compiler is
> buggy!"


Around here I usually hear "The *($@&&^ library is junk. I have to write
my own!"


Post a followup to this message

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