bugzilla template

Steven Schveighoffer schveiguy at yahoo.com
Fri Jul 15 11:34:59 PDT 2011


On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 13:34:53 -0400, Vladimir Panteleev  
<vladimir at thecybershadow.net> wrote:

> On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 18:45:15 +0300, Steven Schveighoffer  
> <schveiguy at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> 4. What is your expected result?
>>
>> 5. What is the actual result?
>
> I hate bug reporting forms that FORCE you to answer these questions.  
> Most of the time they will be along the lines of "4. It should work" and  
> "5. The error message I specified above appears". A template is nice,  
> but I would avoid saying that answering all questions is mandatory  
> unless simply listing them as a guideline shows to be ineffective.
>

It would not be enforced, it would be the text that appears by default in  
the description.  Of course, you can just delete all that and write your  
own, or you could just ignore the questions I suppose.

It's just that we get bug reports like:

Summary: dmd doesn't compile this

Description:

void main()
{
    writefln("hello world");
}


With nothing else.  Who freaking knows why this doesn't compile on X's  
system?  But with an error message like:

Error: writefln not defined

Then I don't have to guess, it's close as invalid, takes about 10 seconds  
out of my life instead of 10 minutes.

The expected/actual is more for cases where the code is doing something  
you don't expect like "I expected this to print 0 but it prints 1  
instead"  Again, bug reports come in where the code is the only clue, and  
if the code works as defined, it's hard to determine what is perceived as  
wrong.

I'm thinking something like this would reduce the amount of time it takes  
to debug the trivial bug reports (invalid, works as defined, duplicate,  
etc.).

-Steve


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list