www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.bugs - [Issue 2573] New: [Tracker] Data integrity issues

reply d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2573

           Summary: [Tracker] Data integrity issues
           Product: D
           Version: unspecified
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: All
            Status: NEW
          Keywords: accepts-invalid, wrong-code
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: DMD
        AssignedTo: bugzilla digitalmars.com
        ReportedBy: smjg iname.com
 BugsThisDependsOn: 302,519,602,1161,1339,1410,1426,1983,2361,2544


This is a tracker for issues in the compiler and/or the D specification that
compromise the integrity of data in some way.  These can include:
- holes in the D2 const/invariant system
- cases in which a variable fails to be initialised
- places where protection attributes are not honoured, making it possible to
mess with a module's internal workings
- wrong-code bugs that corrupt data
- places where measures to check data integrity at runtime cannot be relied
upon

This tracker doesn't cover ways in which the programmer can deliberately bypass
D's features that are meant to protect against data corruption.  Rather, the
point is to show how we have a D that isn't as robust against data corruption
as it's cracked up to be.


--
Jan 10 2009
next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2573


Don <clugdbug yahoo.com.au> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |INVALID



Closing this because it adds no value. The bugs in this list bear no relation
to one another, and this bug report doesn't help in getting them fixed.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Feb 08 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2573


Stewart Gordon <smjg iname.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
         Resolution|INVALID                     |



It isn't supposed to help get them fixed.  It's supposed to see how we're doing
towards having a D language/compiler that's robust against data corruption.

There was a discussion back then about having trackers here, and there was no
objection.  If some authority has banned them since, please point me to the
statement.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Feb 08 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2573


Don <clugdbug yahoo.com.au> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|REOPENED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED




 There was a discussion back then about having trackers here, and there was no


objection.  If some authority has banned them since, please point me to the
statement.


Walter Bright to d-runtime, 8 Feb
On 2/7/2013 5:22 PM, Brad Roberts wrote:

    Keywords are fully maintained (beyond the point of creation) on the bugs
that utilize that keyword. When there's no open bugs in that category, there's
no bugs with the keyword. Unlike umbrella bugs which would end up being closed
and reopened as bugs are found. There's no clear 'done' with umbrella bugs. See
1001, the stack trace bug, for a classic case of where they're an anti-pattern.


I agree with Brad. Umbrella bugs seem like a great idea, until you use them.
--------

And this one isn't even an umbrella bug, it's a personal gripe list.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Mar 04 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2573






 Keywords are fully maintained (beyond the point of creation) on the 
 bugs that utilize that keyword.


Where is the keyword for data integrity issues?


 When there's no open bugs in that category, there's no bugs with 
 the keyword. Unlike umbrella bugs which would end up being closed 
 and reopened as bugs are found.  There's no clear 'done' with 
 umbrella bugs. See 1001, the stack trace bug, for a classic case of 
 where they're an anti-pattern.


That's true, and in principle keywords could mostly replace tracker issues.  In
practice, they need to be created by someone who has the necessary access to do
so.  It might be easier to get a keyword created on a small Bugzilla like this
one compared to a big one like bugzilla.mozilla.org, but still....


 I agree with Brad. Umbrella bugs seem like a great idea, until you 
 use them.


Still, it's only the opinion of a few people.  OK, so there are probably more
whom we don't know about.  But clearly many people find them useful for various
reasons.  The commonness of them on b.m.o is evidence of this.


 And this one isn't even an umbrella bug, it's a personal gripe list.


How does a collection of data integrity bugs constitute a "personal gripe
list"???

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Mar 04 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2573








 Keywords are fully maintained (beyond the point of creation) on the 
 bugs that utilize that keyword.


 
 Where is the keyword for data integrity issues?


There isn't, it covers too many disparate things to be a helpful category. It
has a very large overlap with wrong-code.


 Still, it's only the opinion of a few people.  OK, so there are probably more
 whom we don't know about.  But clearly many people find them useful for various
 reasons.  The commonness of them on b.m.o is evidence of this.


Nobody fixing D bugs has found them useful AFAIK. BTW this is the almost the
only remaining umbrella bug in the D bugzilla.


 And this one isn't even an umbrella bug, it's a personal gripe list.


 
 How does a collection of data integrity bugs constitute a "personal gripe
 list"???


To quote the bug description:
"the point is to show how we have a D that isn't as robust against data
corruption as it's cracked up to be."

Very similar to your old "pending peeves" list. That's fine for a wiki, but
doesn't belong in Bugzilla. It doesn't contribute to getting anything fixed.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Mar 05 2013
prev sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2573


Stewart Gordon <smjg iname.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
         Resolution|FIXED                       |







 Where is the keyword for data integrity issues?


 
 There isn't, it covers too many disparate things to be a 
 helpful category.


In your opinion.


 It has a very large overlap with wrong-code.


How do you work that out?


 Still, it's only the opinion of a few people.  OK, so 
 there are probably more whom we don't know about.  But 
 clearly many people find them useful for various reasons.  
 The commonness of them on b.m.o is evidence of this.


 
 Nobody fixing D bugs has found them useful AFAIK. BTW this 
 is the almost the only remaining umbrella bug in the D 
 bugzilla.


What has usefulness to a specific minority of users to do with anything?  The
fact remains that some people find trackers useful.


 How does a collection of data integrity bugs constitute a 
 "personal gripe list"???


 
 To quote the bug description:
 "the point is to show how we have a D that isn't as robust 
 against data corruption as it's cracked up to be."
 
 Very similar to your old "pending peeves" list. That's 
 fine for a wiki, but doesn't belong in Bugzilla. It 
 doesn't contribute to getting anything fixed.


You haven't answered the question at all.  How does "a D that isn't as robust
against data corruption as it's cracked up to be" equate to "a D that isn't to
some random individual's liking"?

In any case, the fact remains that we need more people's opinions before
deciding what to do with this issue.  I'll start a discussion on the newsgroup
about it when I've a bit more time (hopefully this evening).

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Mar 06 2013