Re: Catastrophic compiler errors

Shankar Unni <>
13 Apr 2002 23:10:45 -0400

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
Catastrophic compiler errors (Mark Lacey \[MSFT\]) (2002-04-06)
Re: Catastrophic compiler errors (2002-04-07)
Re: Catastrophic compiler errors (2002-04-10)
Re: Catastrophic compiler errors (Andre Vergison) (2002-04-10)
Re: Catastrophic compiler errors (Shankar Unni) (2002-04-13)
Re: Catastrophic compiler errors (Joachim Durchholz) (2002-04-16)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: Shankar Unni <>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 13 Apr 2002 23:10:45 -0400
Organization: EarthLink Inc. --
References: 02-04-035 02-04-058 02-04-062
Keywords: errors, practice
Posted-Date: 13 Apr 2002 23:10:45 EDT

Nick Maclaren wrote:

> I should be extremely surprised if some such bugs had not been
> involved, but catastrophic errors are usually the result of a
> combination of many failures.

Not to mention inadequate testing.

After all, is there really a fundamental difference between code not
working because of the writer's mistake, or the compiler's mistake? An
error is an error, and testing should catch it if the software is
designed and tested properly.

Would anyone test with one version of a compiler, and at the last
moment pick up a new compiler and recompile everything with it, sight

Post a followup to this message

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