Many of us post what we uncover as bugs or inconsistencies. Some are purely misunderstandings, whilst others are glaring errors.

Rather than Walter just trying to keep them all in his head, and/or perhaps missing some posts, wouldn't it be more productive to sanction some site as a "quasi-official" bug-list? This newsgroup doesn't cut it because a) bugs are interspersed with other conversations and b) there's never any status feedback (except by looking at the change-log upon subsequent compiler releases).

There's at least one Wiki page that tries to address this, but without general consent, especially from Walter <g>, it's somewhat of a lost cause ...

Perhaps there's some issue over negative publicity? I would certainly hope not. How about it folks? Does Walter already manage a list like this? Am I just wasting your time?

BTW: this is intended to help the release process; not hinder it.

- Kris

"Kris" <someidiot@earthlink.dot.dot.dot.net> wrote in message news:c66gsp$1tgc$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Many of us post what we uncover as bugs or inconsistencies. Some are
purely
> misunderstandings, whilst others are glaring errors.

Now, I know this is my second post here, but I just thought I might offer a cent or two...

I'm all the fan of forums, newsgroups, etc.  After all, I am the lead developer of one.  But, they have their limits... they just can't do everything.

Projects like PHP (http://bugs.php.net/) and Mozilla
(http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/) handle bugs in a very streamlined and clean
way.  In fact, Mozilla uses a forum as well (http://forums.mozillazine.org/)
but after they are discussed there they are posted as bugs on BugZilla.

The problem is that this takes organization, moderation, and the like.  It is no one or two person job to handle this, and you have to have a few people there just to mark bugs as duplicates of other bugs.

However, it can also make it a lot easier to organize the bugs, discuss the bugs, etc.  RFE can also be done... and these systems provide much better management (what has happened to this bug, when it is expected to be resolved, etc.) than a forum would... simply because they are specialized.

Now, I realize your post is simply about a listing of bugs, but that is one of the points of a bug listing system.

Just my cent and a half.

Thanks,
-[Unknown]

Kris wrote:

>Perhaps there's some issue over negative publicity?
>  
>
I think this is big W's reason against a bug list.

-- 
-Anderson: http://badmama.com.au/~anderson/

J Anderson wrote:
> Kris wrote:
> 
>> Perhaps there's some issue over negative publicity?
>>  
>>
> I think this is big W's reason against a bug list.
> 
Thats what big W said whenever this discussion came up...
Maybe this time again?

"Stephan Wienczny" <wienczny@web.de> wrote in message news:c66n0s$290v$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Thats what big W said whenever this discussion came up... Maybe this time again?

I find that a consistent and strong bug reporting system can actually be positive.  It shows that development is moving... especially to those who have problems.

All programming projects have bugs.  In fact, all things do - even the specification could, or anything else.  Even C++ could and moreover I'm sure still does have bugs.

Knowing that your problem is being addressed makes people feel like the compiler is for *them*, and also significantly decreases reposting of the bug.

While a publicly viewable list of known bugs can make it look "buggy" to industrial clients, wouldn't it look worse without one?  Most people who would think a list of bugs makes the software less would also think that a language that doesn't have everyone and her brother using it is also not worth using I've found.

But if the descision is to not do it for this reason, I will leave it at that.

-[Unknown]

Unknown W. Brackets wrote:

> "Stephan Wienczny" <wienczny@web.de> wrote in message
> news:c66n0s$290v$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> 
>>Thats what big W said whenever this discussion came up...
>>Maybe this time again?
> 
> 
> I find that a consistent and strong bug reporting system can actually be
> positive.  It shows that development is moving... especially to those who
> have problems.
> 
> All programming projects have bugs.  In fact, all things do - even the
> specification could, or anything else.  Even C++ could and moreover I'm sure
> still does have bugs.
> 
> Knowing that your problem is being addressed makes people feel like the
> compiler is for *them*, and also significantly decreases reposting of the
> bug.
> 
> While a publicly viewable list of known bugs can make it look "buggy" to
> industrial clients, wouldn't it look worse without one?  Most people who
> would think a list of bugs makes the software less would also think that a
> language that doesn't have everyone and her brother using it is also not
> worth using I've found.
> 
> But if the descision is to not do it for this reason, I will leave it at
> that.
> 
> -[Unknown]
> 
> 
Walter should have a look a what his competitors are doing.
As you can see this file from intel containing a list of bugs in intel C++. ftp://download.intel.com/support/performancetools/c/c_swdefects.pdf

In article <c66ofa$2bf3$1@digitaldaemon.com>,
 "Unknown W. Brackets" <unknown@at.simplemachines.dot.org> wrote:
> I find that a consistent and strong bug reporting system can actually be positive.  It shows that development is moving... especially to those who have problems.

Hear hear.  Mozilla (and its components from which FireFox sprung) is certainly better than it would have been without bugzilla.

Benefits of using bugzilla-like tools that are obvious to me:

1) bugs can be prioritized, so that the most important fixes are done more often than lesser ones.  As a result more bug-free code goes out to the masses which leads more people to use it.

2) a lot of users don't have to spend their time typing a bug report with instructions on how to reproduce the bug, because some other user already did that (and it looks like D is going to have a *lot* of new users in the coming months).

3) new developers looking for a place to start can just look at a list of unassigned bugs without bothering the core developers who are probably dealing with more complex problems.

4) even if a bug isn't fixed, at least there's a database entry for it, and thus a common place to go to for information on when (or if) to expect a fix.  This is probably also where people affected by the bug will learn useful work-arounds.

5) when a developer starts attacking a bug, he doesn't have to hunt for information relating to it.  It's all in a single database entry, which may have been added to by other users.

6) the database tells you who took responsibility for each bug.  That means less duplication of effort. It also tells you who knows the most about any particular bug, so if the assignee is to busy with other tasks at the moment, someone else can pick up the slack after a quick briefing.

7) users can be automatically notified by email when a bug gets fixed.


...The only *real* downside I've heard so far is that it sucks up a good portion of time for whomever decides to help maintain the database.  But for everyone else, it's a time saver and productivity booster.

Does that sound fair & accurate?

James Widman wrote:
> ...The only *real* downside I've heard so far is that it sucks up a good portion of time for whomever decides to help maintain the database.  But for everyone else, it's a time saver and productivity booster.

Right, but this can be done by people with no coding ability.  In my past experience, people like this who want to contribute are much easier to come by than otherwise.

> Does that sound fair & accurate?

Yes.  You seem to have a lot to say about bug reporting systems.... I'm planning to get some work in on one in about a month. (too much other work to do right now..)  I plan to simplify moderation and make the look better, as well as use PHP and MySQL instead of Perl like Bugzilla does.  I've already designed some of the database, as well...

I plan this mainly because SMF (the forum I write) currently has no bug reporting system beside the forum, and I am not happy with any of the existing ones.  But I still want to make a release out of it that can be used and extended by all.

If you'd be willing to give me comments on what you might think bug reporting systems currently miss, or need more of, etc... I'd be very grateful.

Maybe if everything went just right, my bug system could be at some point used for D ;).  But that's just me being hopeful.

-[Unknown]

Stephan Wienczny wrote:
> J Anderson wrote:
> 
>> Kris wrote:
>>
>>> Perhaps there's some issue over negative publicity?
>>>  
>>>
>> I think this is big W's reason against a bug list.
>>
> Thats what big W said whenever this discussion came up...
> Maybe this time again?

This is the best reference I could find to Walter's dislike of bug lists:

"I published a carefully documented bug list once in the past. It was a
disaster." -- Walter, http://www.digitalmars.com/drn-bin/wwwnews?D/23404

I'm pretty sure there's a longer version of this story somewhere in the archives, but I haven't been able to locate it.

-- 
Justin
http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/

J C Calvarese wrote:
> Stephan Wienczny wrote:
> 
>> J Anderson wrote:
>>
>>> Kris wrote:
>>>
>>>> Perhaps there's some issue over negative publicity?
>>>>  
>>>>
>>> I think this is big W's reason against a bug list.
>>>
>> Thats what big W said whenever this discussion came up...
>> Maybe this time again?
> 
> 
> This is the best reference I could find to Walter's dislike of bug lists:
> 
> "I published a carefully documented bug list once in the past. It was a
> disaster." -- Walter, http://www.digitalmars.com/drn-bin/wwwnews?D/23404

IIRC, the problem was the bug list was used against Walter to show that his software is "buggy".

> 
> I'm pretty sure there's a longer version of this story somewhere in the archives, but I haven't been able to locate it.
> 


-- 
Justin
http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/