On 4 January 2016 at 02:10, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote: > On 1/3/16 12:19 AM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote: >> >> I know I'll just get complaints from people to submit bugs; I have >> submit lots, and in many cases, I've tried to, but they're almost >> impossible to produce in isolation, only when a project gets 'real', ie, >> big enough that it's realistic in scope does it all start to break down. >> It's really hard to reduce a bug that I don't understand, somewhere >> among a program with 30-ish interconnected modules. > > > What I do is make a fresh copy of the project tree, and then start pruning > (heh) that down. Prune, rebuild, prune, rebuild etc. Whatever makes the > error go away put back in (editor "undo" is handy). It takes some getting > used to but it's an effective tool for reducing a bug to its essentials. I > suspect in your case e.g. no function definition is even necessary - only > declarations. -- Andrei
Yeah, I've used this process before. Last time I reported a raft of LDC bugs I spent a few days doing this... but it's very laborious, and I don't have time to do it. I'm doing this work on borrowed time as it is. I need to feel productive and like I'm making progress, otherwise it fails to compete for timeshare with other high priority goals >_< The thing is, it's wasted effort anyway, because it's almost all a symptom of a bad design that should be changed for design reasons alone, regardless of bugs. Walter has already submit a patch for what I think is the key non-design-related bug causing me problems. I expect that'll lead to a lot less random errors and misdiagnoses when hacking at the main task of working-around the problems caused by broken design. I wonder if there's chance of getting the fix into 2.070? That would be really rocking.
