[Issue 2573] New: [Tracker] Data integrity issues

Jan 10, 2009

d-bugmail

Feb 08, 2013

Don

Feb 08, 2013

Mar 04, 2013

Mar 04, 2013

Mar 05, 2013

Mar 06, 2013

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2573 Summary: [Tracker] Data integrity issues Product: D Version: unspecified Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Keywords: accepts-invalid, wrong-code Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: DMD AssignedTo: bugzilla@digitalmars.com ReportedBy: smjg@iname.com BugsThisDependsOn: 302,519,602,1161,1339,1410,1426,1983,2361,2544 This is a tracker for issues in the compiler and/or the D specification that compromise the integrity of data in some way. These can include: - holes in the D2 const/invariant system - cases in which a variable fails to be initialised - places where protection attributes are not honoured, making it possible to mess with a module's internal workings - wrong-code bugs that corrupt data - places where measures to check data integrity at runtime cannot be relied upon This tracker doesn't cover ways in which the programmer can deliberately bypass D's features that are meant to protect against data corruption. Rather, the point is to show how we have a D that isn't as robust against data corruption as it's cracked up to be. --

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2573 Stewart Gordon <smjg@iname.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED Resolution|INVALID | --- Comment #2 from Stewart Gordon <smjg@iname.com> 2013-02-08 04:38:28 PST --- It isn't supposed to help get them fixed. It's supposed to see how we're doing towards having a D language/compiler that's robust against data corruption. There was a discussion back then about having trackers here, and there was no objection. If some authority has banned them since, please point me to the statement. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2573 Don <clugdbug@yahoo.com.au> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED --- Comment #3 from Don <clugdbug@yahoo.com.au> 2013-03-04 04:33:47 PST --- > There was a discussion back then about having trackers here, and there was no objection. If some authority has banned them since, please point me to the statement. Walter Bright to d-runtime, 8 Feb On 2/7/2013 5:22 PM, Brad Roberts wrote: Keywords are fully maintained (beyond the point of creation) on the bugs that utilize that keyword. When there's no open bugs in that category, there's no bugs with the keyword. Unlike umbrella bugs which would end up being closed and reopened as bugs are found. There's no clear 'done' with umbrella bugs. See 1001, the stack trace bug, for a classic case of where they're an anti-pattern. I agree with Brad. Umbrella bugs seem like a great idea, until you use them. -------- And this one isn't even an umbrella bug, it's a personal gripe list. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2573 --- Comment #4 from Stewart Gordon <smjg@iname.com> 2013-03-04 05:40:47 PST --- (In reply to comment #3) > Keywords are fully maintained (beyond the point of creation) on the bugs that utilize that keyword. Where is the keyword for data integrity issues? > When there's no open bugs in that category, there's no bugs with the keyword. Unlike umbrella bugs which would end up being closed and reopened as bugs are found. There's no clear 'done' with umbrella bugs. See 1001, the stack trace bug, for a classic case of where they're an anti-pattern. That's true, and in principle keywords could mostly replace tracker issues. In practice, they need to be created by someone who has the necessary access to do so. It might be easier to get a keyword created on a small Bugzilla like this one compared to a big one like bugzilla.mozilla.org, but still.... > I agree with Brad. Umbrella bugs seem like a great idea, until you use them. Still, it's only the opinion of a few people. OK, so there are probably more whom we don't know about. But clearly many people find them useful for various reasons. The commonness of them on b.m.o is evidence of this. > And this one isn't even an umbrella bug, it's a personal gripe list. How does a collection of data integrity bugs constitute a "personal gripe list"??? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2573 --- Comment #5 from Don <clugdbug@yahoo.com.au> 2013-03-05 02:12:54 PST --- (In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #3) > > Keywords are fully maintained (beyond the point of creation) on the bugs that utilize that keyword. > > Where is the keyword for data integrity issues? There isn't, it covers too many disparate things to be a helpful category. It has a very large overlap with wrong-code. > Still, it's only the opinion of a few people. OK, so there are probably more whom we don't know about. But clearly many people find them useful for various reasons. The commonness of them on b.m.o is evidence of this. Nobody fixing D bugs has found them useful AFAIK. BTW this is the almost the only remaining umbrella bug in the D bugzilla. > > And this one isn't even an umbrella bug, it's a personal gripe list. > > How does a collection of data integrity bugs constitute a "personal gripe list"??? To quote the bug description: "the point is to show how we have a D that isn't as robust against data corruption as it's cracked up to be." Very similar to your old "pending peeves" list. That's fine for a wiki, but doesn't belong in Bugzilla. It doesn't contribute to getting anything fixed. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

March 06, 2013

[Issue 2573] [Tracker] Data integrity issues

Posted by Stewart Gordon
in reply to d-bugmail

Permalink

Stewart Gordon

Posted in reply to d-bugmail

Permalink

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2573


Stewart Gordon <smjg@iname.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
         Resolution|FIXED                       |


--- Comment #6 from Stewart Gordon <smjg@iname.com> 2013-03-06 05:20:21 PST ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> (In reply to comment #4)
>> Where is the keyword for data integrity issues?
> 
> There isn't, it covers too many disparate things to be a helpful category.

In your opinion.

> It has a very large overlap with wrong-code.

How do you work that out?

>> Still, it's only the opinion of a few people.  OK, so there are probably more whom we don't know about.  But clearly many people find them useful for various reasons. The commonness of them on b.m.o is evidence of this.
> 
> Nobody fixing D bugs has found them useful AFAIK. BTW this is the almost the only remaining umbrella bug in the D bugzilla.

What has usefulness to a specific minority of users to do with anything?  The fact remains that some people find trackers useful.

>> How does a collection of data integrity bugs constitute a "personal gripe list"???
> 
> To quote the bug description:
> "the point is to show how we have a D that isn't as robust
> against data corruption as it's cracked up to be."
> 
> Very similar to your old "pending peeves" list. That's fine for a wiki, but doesn't belong in Bugzilla. It doesn't contribute to getting anything fixed.

You haven't answered the question at all.  How does "a D that isn't as robust against data corruption as it's cracked up to be" equate to "a D that isn't to some random individual's liking"?

In any case, the fact remains that we need more people's opinions before deciding what to do with this issue.  I'll start a discussion on the newsgroup about it when I've a bit more time (hopefully this evening).

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

Forums