The internals of testing in Rust in 2018

Re:The internals of testing in Rust in 2018 by WalterBright on Monday July 23, 2018 @09:43PM (#17597494)

Amusing anecdote - back in 1982, I took a 2 week compiler course from Hennessy and Ullman at Stanford. I decided to implement the data flow analysis techniques in my C compiler. It appeared as Datalight Optimum C.

The benchmarks used by the computer magazines were all dead code, and so the flow analysis deleted them. The journalists sadly concluded and wrote that DC was an utterly broken compiler :-(

This problem persisted until a year or two later when Borland and Microsoft caught up. They had much better marketing teams (!). The benchmarks got changed.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The internals of testing in Rust in 2018 by oblio on Tuesday July 24, 2018 @05:59AM (#17599515)

Well, at least today you'd be able to start a Twitter war and with a few strategically placed Reddit and HN posts you'd shame them into fixing their benchmarks :)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The internals of testing in Rust in 2018 by WalterBright on Tuesday July 24, 2018 @04:42PM (#17604745)

In those days, what could you do? Write a strongly worded letter to the editor? Have the magazine print a retraction two months later for their feature article? Not going to happen.

[ Parent | on HN ]