> If the code you write is uncovering bugs in compiler, you literally are too smart for your own good.
Definitely not in my case -- sometimes we just stumble over these things. As an inexperienced programmer (around 1989 or 1990?) I found a bug in the beta of microsoft's first C++ compiler, shipped on a dozen 5.25" floppy discs. All the other developers around me said "Don't be stupid. It's your code, it's not the compiler!" but I distilled it down to a minimal test case and proved it. The bug?
i=i+i;
That's it. It would give random results based on prior instructions unrelated to i.
I reported it and got a nice note back from the MSFT engineering team. Something like "Wow! I've no idea how we missed this. Good catch!"
Definitely not in my case -- sometimes we just stumble over these things. As an inexperienced programmer (around 1989 or 1990?) I found a bug in the beta of microsoft's first C++ compiler, shipped on a dozen 5.25" floppy discs. All the other developers around me said "Don't be stupid. It's your code, it's not the compiler!" but I distilled it down to a minimal test case and proved it. The bug?
i=i+i;
That's it. It would give random results based on prior instructions unrelated to i.
I reported it and got a nice note back from the MSFT engineering team. Something like "Wow! I've no idea how we missed this. Good catch!"