Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    
Browse thread
Search for the smallest possible possible Ocaml segfault....
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Oliver Bandel <oliver@f...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] STOP (was: Search for the smallest possible possible Ocaml segfault)
Hello Xavier,


Zitat von Xavier Leroy <Xavier.Leroy@inria.fr>:

> Guys,
>
> Before posting this kind of messages, I'd like you to stop for a
> second and think about what you're doing.  The answer is: a disservice
> to the Caml community.
[...]

I hope that nobody has intended this.
And I doubt that people wanted to disservice the OCaml-community.

For me OCaml is the best language I've used.
I think, most people here will agree.

Segfaults in OCaml are seldom, but nevertheless
those seldom seen segfaults should be fixed.

The original poster stated out that the bug he
posted was four months on status "new".

This was a littlebid astonishing, and possibly
the reason why this thread was started.


[...]
> Yes, OCaml has bugs, like all software of this complexity -- and
> probably a lot less than your own software.  Be supportive and
> cooperative: post bug reports with repro cases where they belong, on
> the bug tracking system, and let us developers handle them the way we
> see fit.
[...]

Yes, I agree here.

But it's not so easy to find a real bug in Ocaml,
so people might not be motivated to make a login-account
on the bugtracker and remember another password for
something that seldom is in use. ;-)


>
> That kind of snickering posts is neither helpful nor supportive.

I hope theese bugs will be all reported.
And also I hope, they will be fixed then.

I hope that you don't get any trouble from theese posts.


I for myself have only stated that I hope the bugs will be fixed.

The thing that I laughed about, really was a joke,
because sending SIGSEGV to PID = 0 means that the program
has to abort with a SIGSEGV, because it sends that signal to itself.

So, this was NOT a Ocaml-bug, and it was NOT a bug at all.
So, I think laughing about that is NOT laughing about OCaml.


I hope you can see this thread with humor, if not today,
maybe later.


There is no reason for you to be bothered here.
Your work is undisputed.


Best Regards,
     Oliver Bandel