Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!pcrat!rick
From: rick@pcrat.UUCP (Rick Richardson)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: using assembler (vs HLL, etc)
Message-ID: <546@pcrat.UUCP>
Date: 31 Jul 88 03:31:52 GMT
References: <12729@mimsy.UUCP> <517@dms.UUCP>
Reply-To: rick@pcrat.UUCP (Rick Richardson)
Organization: PC Research, Inc., Tinton Falls, NJ
Lines: 25

In article <517@dms.UUCP> albaugh@dms.UUCP (Mike Albaugh) writes:
>especially difficult for C compilers for the 68000). Anyway, what is the
>orthodox way to deal with the fact that your 50,000 lines of debugged, tested
>code become 50,000 lines of un-debugged, un-tested code every time a new
>release of the compiler comes out.I know about regression testing, but the last
>time it ONLY munged the multiply that was concerned with the average up-time
>of a machine, so I didn't hear about it until a machine in the field had been
>running continuously for over 32767 minutes. Any suggestions?

Never, ever, switch tools on production quality software unless you have
to.  If you absolutely have to change tools, treat the software as you
would the first time it is sent to system test -- take nothing for granted.








-- 
		Rick Richardson, PC Research, Inc.

(201) 542-3734 (voice, nights)   OR     (201) 389-8963 (voice, days)
uunet!pcrat!rick (UUCP)			rick%pcrat.uucp@uunet.uu.net (INTERNET)