Re: Overriding discriminants perplexes GNAT 3.14p

[Stephen Leake <stephen.a.leake.1@gsfc.nasa.gov>]

Dmitry A.Kazakov <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:

> Hi!
> 
> The following primitive code causes "GNAT bug detected" report:
> 
> <code snipped>
>
> This results in a bug report (crash)  under Windows.

Also with GNAT 3.15a1

> What wonders me is which sort of validation uses ACT if such bugs go
> through? 

Very thorough.

> People rightly criticize MS VC++, but the situation with Ada
> compilers isn't much better. 

Yes it is (in my experience). I've found bugs in _every_ compiler I've
ever used. At least with GNAT I have a chance of getting them fixed!
And they are in more and more obscure corners of the language as time
goes on and more testing is done. MS VC++ bugs are in the core of the
language, and they have no problem with not being standard-compliant,
and they introduce new bugs with every release.

> I judge from my experience with GNAT and Object Ada. 

GNAT is better than Object Ada

> It is a permanent battle of finding work-arounds for countless

Hmm. I have a record of all the bugs I've submitted. Total is 24, over
3 years. And that includes some Emacs Ada-mode bugs. Hardly "countless"!

> compiler bugs. Is there any good Ada compilers since DEC gone?

DEC was good. GNAT is better! And yes, I _did_ find bugs in the DEC
Ada compiler.

Compilers are _extremely_ complicated systems. It is _not_ possible to
ensure they have no bugs.

Please report your bug to report@gnat.com, following the instructions
in the GNAT BUG box. Or let me know, and I'll do it.

-- 
-- Stephe