Message-ID: <327127F4.C97@ananke.amu.edu.pl>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 22:49:56 +0200
From: Mark Habersack <grendel AT ananke DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl>
Reply-To: grendel AT ananke DOT amu DOT edu DOT pl
Organization: home, sweet home
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Alaric B. Williams" <alaric AT abwillms DOT demon DOT co DOT uk>
CC: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: DJGPP V2.01 Released
References: <846263987 DOT 18931 DOT 0 AT abwillms DOT demon DOT co DOT uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Alaric B. Williams wrote:

> >   'Bounds Checking for C'
> >   (see http://www-ala.doc.ic.ac.uk/~phjk/BoundsChecking.html)
> 
> > option in a DJGPP build compiler? Most time I just turn around and
> > around
> > to find those little stupid errors accessing arrays, dynamic chains, ...
> 
> Hmmm, anybody have any opinions?
Yeah. I think that such a thing (which works similarily to Nu-Mega's
BoundsChecker) would be a great thing. And since it'd be in the compiler
itself, it'd work seamlessly just showing the programmer stupid typos or
mistakes s/he made. I have many hours behind me spent tracking stupid
bugs which were result of just missing
a '+' here or '=' there. Take, for example, the famous bug:

	#define SOME_MACRO(x) ((x < 3) ? (x) : 0)

	char   *foo = some_ptr_to_some_string;

	while(SOME_MACRO(*foo++))
		counter++;

This code might work for some time (even a long one) without any
problems, and yet if you want to look at EVERY element of 'foo' string,
you might find yourself out in the bushes some day...
NM BoundSchecker catches this bug, and I imagine so does this checker -
it'd be great to have it aboard.

> I don't want to end up with a superfat everything included version,
> simply because many people just want things like the section
> attribute fixed. I certainly won't put in the Pentium patch, since I
> don't have a pentium, and I wouldn't be happy about putting something
> on the page I can't fully test!
I second it. Any patches proposed must be checked thoroughly by the
people who really need and use them. We 
have checked the __attribute__((section)) patch and it works OK - it's
got its pass. Now, I heard that the
Pentium patch makes many Linux drivers go crazy - do you really want it
now, guys? I don't.

> Well, if everyone wants it in there, I'll put it in.
If you can, do it, please.

> At the moment, I'm only planning on applying the attribute
> ((section)) patch.
Hey, that's the start! I'd suggest setting up a strictly INFORMATIONAL
web page with a list of all the patches applied so that it all is, at
least a little bit, co-ordinated. Also a posting to djgpp-announce would
be desired.

-- 
============================================================================
She nervously undressed in the dancing beams of the Fidra lighthouse
Giving it all away before it's too late. She'll let her lover's tongue
move in a warm wet circle, giving it all away and showing no shame.
She'll take her mother's kiss on her first broken heart, a warm wet
circle,
she'll realise that she plays her part in a warm wet circle...
====================== http://ananke.amu.edu.pl/~grendel
===================