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