On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 07:23:43AM -0700, Darrin Chandler wrote: > On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 01:53:00PM +0100, Karel Kulhavy wrote: > > It's therefore not the responsibility of the programmer to check whether the > > result of optimization is correct. Therefore it's not the optimizations that > > are source of bugs, but bugs in GCC. > > But if you write a program and the user finds it full of bugs, are they > going to care that you can say that it's GCC's fault? The burden falls > on the developers to make code that works, including working around > problems in the compiler. Sad, but true.
We can analogically use this argument for ocassional errors in memory, too. If I write a program and the user finds it crashing all the time, are they going to care that you can say that their hardware may be unstable? OpenBSD then should be written with Hamming, Golay, or Reed-Solomon codes in all the internal structures, to automatically recover from flipped bits in data structures. Similar protection should be done to the code. The code should be periodically CRC-ed and the process image snapshotted. If it were revealed the code is corrupted, a rollback would be done and the process restarted. CL< > > -- > Darrin Chandler | Phoenix BSD Users Group > [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://bsd.phoenix.az.us/ > http://www.stilyagin.com/darrin/ |
