OSDK Issue Tracker

Questions, bug reports, features requests, ... about the Oric Software Development Kit. Please indicate clearly in the title the related element (OSDK for generic questions, PictConv, FilePack, XA, Euphoric, etc...) to make it easy to locate messages.

Post Reply
User avatar
Dbug
Site Admin
Posts: 3032
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 10:00 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway
Contact:

OSDK Issue Tracker

Post by Dbug » Sun Mar 17, 2019 2:29 pm

Hi,
I've tweaked a bit the Issue page on the OSDK website:
http://www.osdk.org/index.php?page=issues

Now you can sort issues by Component (XA, PictConv, etc...), ID, Date, or Reporter (name of who reported issues).

Additionally, there's a bug reporting field at the top that can be expanded to send report, feel free to try it, even if it's to submit fake/test reports, so I can see if it work, and feedback is obviously welcome.

Thanks!

User avatar
NekoNoNiaow
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 272
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 10:08 pm
Location: Montreal, Canadia

Re: OSDK Issue Tracker

Post by NekoNoNiaow » Thu Mar 28, 2019 3:32 am

Nice!
I have just added a new issue (compiler.exe crashing ;) ).
Will be adding a new one soon. ;)

User avatar
Dbug
Site Admin
Posts: 3032
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 10:00 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway
Contact:

Re: OSDK Issue Tracker

Post by Dbug » Thu Mar 28, 2019 8:41 am

Ok, so what I received is that:

Code: Select all

-------------------------
OSDK issue reporting:
-------------------------
Form details below:

Osdk Version: OSDK 1.13
Osdk Component: compiler
User Comment: Compiler.exe crashes when compiling the following source:
--
void main(void)
{
  int returnValue;
  char* argv[] = { "dhrystone" };
  returnValue = main( sizeof(argv) / sizeof(*argv), argv );
}
--
Compile with:
%OSDK%\BIN\compiler.exe -Nlibc -O0 source.c >source.c2

User Name: nekoniaow@forum.defence-force.org
Email: 
-------------------------
obviously the process to add it to the tracker is manual, but in any case, even with some real issue tracker, one needs to go through the reports, check if they are usable, prioritize, etc... so I don't see that as an actual problem in practice :)

I'll add it to the actual issue page during the weekend :)

User avatar
retroric
Pilot Officer
Posts: 90
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Paris, France

Re: OSDK Issue Tracker

Post by retroric » Sat Mar 30, 2019 1:12 pm

Hi,

Err... What is the interest of this code anyway that just looks to me as an endless recursive calling sequence of main() with the wrong dunction signature ?! :shock: :shock:

I guess the compiler actually detected the code was nonsense and decided to call it quits ! :lol:
flag_fr RetrOric, aka laurentd75 flag_uk
            GitHub - RetrOric

User avatar
Dbug
Site Admin
Posts: 3032
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 10:00 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway
Contact:

Re: OSDK Issue Tracker

Post by Dbug » Sat Mar 30, 2019 2:06 pm

retroric wrote:
Sat Mar 30, 2019 1:12 pm
Hi,

Err... What is the interest of this code anyway that just looks to me as an endless recursive calling sequence of main() with the wrong dunction signature ?! :shock: :shock:

I guess the compiler actually detected the code was nonsense and decided to call it quits ! :lol:
Alternatively, you can see that as a simple way to generate a crash in the compiler, which could possibly have been happening in actual useful code.
One shall never spit on a super simple test case that produce incorrect results :)

User avatar
NekoNoNiaow
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 272
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 10:08 pm
Location: Montreal, Canadia

Re: OSDK Issue Tracker

Post by NekoNoNiaow » Sat Mar 30, 2019 5:54 pm

retroric wrote:
Sat Mar 30, 2019 1:12 pm
Hi,

Err... What is the interest of this code anyway that just looks to me as an endless recursive calling sequence of main() with the wrong dunction signature ?! :shock: :shock:

I guess the compiler actually detected the code was nonsense and decided to call it quits ! :lol:
Well, you should give it a better look because both your impression and your conclusion are incorrect. ;)
  • This is not an endless recursive sequence. main(int argc, char**argv) and main(void) are two different functions, there is no recursion at all.
  • Even if this were recursion, this would still be perfectly valid code anyway, no reason for the compiler to crash. Endless recursion would be perfectly valid C code.
    It is up to the C standard to decide what the compiler should compile or not, not to the compiler. :D
Dbug wrote:
Sat Mar 30, 2019 2:06 pm
Alternatively, you can see that as a simple way to generate a crash in the compiler, which could possibly have been happening in actual useful code.
One shall never spit on a super simple test case that produce incorrect results :)
Absolutely, if the compiler crashes on that perfectly valid C code, then it will likely crash on other similar and valid code and thus needs to be corrected.

Even if the code was really incorrect, crashing on the user is definitely not ok. :D
Crashes needs to be fixed, regardless of the cause. ;)

User avatar
retroric
Pilot Officer
Posts: 90
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Paris, France

Re: OSDK Issue Tracker

Post by retroric » Sun Mar 31, 2019 3:54 pm

Well, there was no "int main(int argc, char**argv)" function in the code snippet DBug posted so looking at this code it seemed it was a very strange case of recursion with the wrong function signature :o

I failed to understand at first how you could have two functions with the same name but with different signatures in C, as function overloading is only available in C++.

Then I thought of course there is the va_args package in C for printf() and the like...

.. and of course it is (more or less) the same for main(), but I must admit I never tried coding a program with two or more main functions with different signatures, I actually cannot see how the linker could decide wich one would be the "main" one to call at program start... :?
flag_fr RetrOric, aka laurentd75 flag_uk
            GitHub - RetrOric

User avatar
NekoNoNiaow
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 272
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2006 10:08 pm
Location: Montreal, Canadia

Re: OSDK Issue Tracker

Post by NekoNoNiaow » Sun Mar 31, 2019 4:15 pm

retroric wrote:
Sun Mar 31, 2019 3:54 pm
Well, there was no "int main(int argc, char**argv)" function in the code snippet DBug posted so looking at this code it seemed it was a very strange case of recursion with the wrong function signature :o
[snip]
.. and of course it is (more or less) the same for main(), but I must admit I never tried coding a program with two or more main functions with different signatures, I actually cannot see how the linker could decide wich one would be the "main" one to call at program start... :?
No worries, this indeed looks strange at first sight.
The reason I ended up with this naming is that the program I am compiling already has a main() function with the standard two parameters (argc, argv) but the Oric's libc entry signature is actually "void main(void)" so I had to add some stub code to link the two calls.

Post Reply