Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!ames!lll-tis!lll-winken!lll-crg.llnl.gov!bowles From: bowles@lll-crg.llnl.gov (Jeff Bowles) Newsgroups: comp.unix.microport Subject: Re: Problems with C compiler Keywords: C, switch() Message-ID: <12670@lll-winken.llnl.gov> Date: 29 Sep 88 13:35:19 GMT References: <1199@gbmatl.UUCP> Sender: usenet@lll-winken.llnl.gov Reply-To: bowles@lll-crg.llnl.gov.UUCP (Jeff Bowles) Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Lines: 20 In article <1199@gbmatl.UUCP> gbm@gbmatl.UUCP (gary mckenney) writes: >The problem occured in a complicated switch() statement... > >I finally determined that >this was caused by the size within the switch statement alone. I called >microport but they had no clue and requested a copy of the code. I didn't >want to bother sending it to them. I tried coming up with a simplified >version of the switch but I was unable to reproduce it.... How can you expect someone ELSE to reproduce a problem that is so complex that you couldn't reduce it to a simpler example? Yet you "didn't want to bother sending it [the original code] to them"? Gees, a customer support person is only as good as the data you give him (her), and it sounds like you fed them little information on a complex problem. End result: the bug that aggravated you will live on, to bug someone else. Whose fault is that? Jeff Bowles