GMP and clang bugginess
nisse at lysator.liu.se
Mon May 25 12:47:55 UTC 2015
tg at gmplib.org (Torbjörn Granlund) writes:
> We could use a short clang whitelist instead of a clang blacklist? Here
> is a beginning: "" :-)
For s start, I think it would make some sense to blacklist all clang
versions until today (but future versions should be assumed working
until proven buggy), and blacklist all 32-bit builds on x86_64 and
freebsd 10. And possibly blacklist ancient gcc versions, including the
one bundled with freebsd?
Those are the most severe OS or compiler issues I remember.
I understand that a too small granularity would make it unmaintainable.
> I disagree. The challenge is making people find the info and actually
> read it. Descriptions of failing scenarios tend to be long, with subtle
> pieces of information which determines the relevance.
It has to be organized so that it's easy to answer the question "Are
there known issues with my operating system and compiler?".
But it's even better if we can get configure to answer that question
> Then maybe we chould have the default make target depend on check... So
> those pesky users have to type
> make i-really-really-want-to-skip-testing
> to build the library without testing it.
> I've played with that idea...
Makes sense to me, since miscompilation seems to be a frequent problem.
Niels Möller. PGP-encrypted email is preferred. Keyid C0B98E26.
Internet email is subject to wholesale government surveillance.
More information about the gmp-devel