On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 10:37:42 -0500, Afriza N. Arief <afriza...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 6:27 AM, Samuel Adam <a...@certifound.com> wrote: > >> A FAQ[2] isn’t enough, as we can see. >> >> To put it another way: Bug reporters should have probable cause before >> they bug others. A compiler warning is only a reasonable articulable >> suspicion. Note that “probable cause” doesn’t imply computer expertise; >> “it crashes” is probable cause. But a compiler warning only means that >> a >> dumb piece of melted sand (i.e., a computer) running a static analysis >> suggested there might be perhaps something wrong with it, maybe. Not >> that >> any actual misbehavior was observed. Relying on a compiler warning >> means >> abdicating wetware to kneel in thrall at the feet of silicon dioxide. >> It’s wrong and it’s stupid. >> >> N.b., I am not accusing hereby Mr. Black of so relying; I just happened >> to >> reply to his message, because the uninitialized-memory trick seemed >> apropos of his message and I think he as a C coder would duly appreciate >> the argument (whether or not he agrees). But the original poster, Mr. >> Arief, posted an apparent copy-and-paste of such warnings with aught >> other >> said but a helpful link to where we can download MSVC Express. It >> happens >> here every few months; I am sick of it, ten thousand other list readers >> are probably sick of it, and it peeves the SQLite team sufficiently that >> they have a FAQ[2,idem] on the topic. > [snip] > Now, I actually did read Testing Process Page[3] a few months back when I > first knew about SQLite but unfortunately it was not carved into my brain > since I didn't face any warning when compiling SQLite at that time. > > I have googled the warning I found and search the mailing list but did > not > find satisfying result. During my short time searching, I only found the > FAQ[2] which again, I think should be revised to refer to Testing Process > Page[3]. > > Did I mention that I actually read a bit of the code around the warning > and > thought of a way to fix it? Nah, I believe I haven't mention it. I gave > up > because I afraid my fix would actually introduce bugs. > > And unfortunately I didn't find/read Testing Process Page[3] during my > recent search. > > Thank you, > > Afriza N. Arief Since you say you checked the sources and found something you thought might merit a change, I suggest that you post your suggested fix so someone who knows the R-Tree module insides can advise of whether it will help or hurt. Since your original post was even helpful enough to provide a link to where people could download MSVC++ Express to reproduce the warnings, and you say you had already read the FAQ on compiler warnings, may I ask why you made no mention thereby of what you had already found reading the source? SQLite bugs are relatively rare; speaking to experience, the last time I reported one on-list, I was promptly shown it had already been found and fixed in trunk. So if you found a bug, I advise you should not hesitate to stomp on it. Very truly, Samuel Adam ◊ <http://certifound.com/> 763 Montgomery Road ◊ Hillsborough, NJ 08844-1304 ◊ United States Legal advice from a non-lawyer: “If you are sued, don’t do what the Supreme Court of New Jersey, its agents, and its officers did.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iT2hEwBfU1g _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
