[Gcl-devel] Re: gcl and the random tester

[Paul F. Dietz]

Camm Maguire wrote:
> Greetings, and thanks as always Paul.  Is it meaningful to get a feel
> for the compiler reliability modulo this missing function?  I'm pretty
> sure I won't have time to get it in for at least a couple of weeks,
> and it would be good to get some feel for how solid the current state
> is.  Again I can probably contribute computer time if you feel like
> pooling these tests across machines.

Yes, it is worthwhile.  Currently these operators are conditionalized
out of the generator, so we can test without them.  Without them,
gcl doesn't have any compiler bugs that I know about that the random
tester can stimulate (although some might exist).

        Paul