Author Topic: C::B fails to start on Windows (Rev 4407)  (Read 18147 times)

Offline MortenMacFly

  • Administrator
  • Lives here!
  • *****
  • Posts: 9694
Re: C::B fails to start on Windows (Rev 4407)
« Reply #15 on: August 27, 2007, 05:34:59 pm »
In multithreaded apps, random or "stochastic" symptoms indicate multithreading problems 90% of the time.
Maybe, but this would not explain why it crashes at home 100% and here at work 0%.
Compiler logging: Settings->Compiler & Debugger->tab "Other"->Compiler logging="Full command line"
C::B Manual: https://www.codeblocks.org/docs/main_codeblocks_en.html
C::B FAQ: https://wiki.codeblocks.org/index.php?title=FAQ

Offline TDragon

  • Lives here!
  • ****
  • Posts: 943
    • TDM-GCC
Re: C::B fails to start on Windows (Rev 4407)
« Reply #16 on: August 27, 2007, 05:48:01 pm »
Maybe, but this would not explain why it crashes at home 100% and here at work 0%.
Certainly it could -- your home PC might be moving fast enough to (for example) slip into a race condition before a semaphore in another thread gets signaled; or it might be slow enough that (for example) a thread that's waiting for data mistakenly decides to act on it before it's received it. The work PC, on the other hand, follows the expected path because it's not too fast or not too slow.
https://jmeubank.github.io/tdm-gcc/ - TDM-GCC compiler suite for Windows (GCC 9.2.0 2020-03-08, 32/64-bit, no extra DLLs)

Offline rickg22

  • Lives here!
  • ****
  • Posts: 2283
Re: C::B fails to start on Windows (Rev 4407)
« Reply #17 on: August 27, 2007, 06:10:13 pm »
I hate to say this, Thomas - but didn't we all agree on "If it ain't broke..."?

I had reverted your code that time not only because I didn't understand it, but because it actually crashed. What I didn't understand was WHY it crashed. After I had reverted it, CB stopped crashing at certain addresses but still crashed on others. Then I fixed my code and everything was fine.

But do whatever you want, it's your code - as long as my 4291 rev plays fine, NP for me.

Offline thomas

  • Administrator
  • Lives here!
  • *****
  • Posts: 3979
Re: C::B fails to start on Windows (Rev 4407)
« Reply #18 on: August 27, 2007, 07:03:00 pm »
I've tried to analyze the Abstractjob code, but it's too complicated for me to understand the program flow. I don't even know if the ORIGINAL code is correct!  :?
You know, Rick... the original code worked fine for 10 months before that... :)

But anyway, I'm through with it. I'll do the revert myself. Just don't ask me again if your code leaks and crashes.
"We should forget about small efficiencies, say about 97% of the time: Premature quotation is the root of public humiliation."

Offline rickg22

  • Lives here!
  • ****
  • Posts: 2283
Re: C::B fails to start on Windows (Rev 4407)
« Reply #19 on: August 27, 2007, 11:18:29 pm »
Thanks! :)

Offline thomas

  • Administrator
  • Lives here!
  • *****
  • Posts: 3979
Re: C::B fails to start on Windows (Rev 4407)
« Reply #20 on: August 28, 2007, 01:42:36 pm »
Speaking of random crashes, both the code completion and the todo list plugin will randomly but consistently crash if the user uses any encoding other than ANSI or UTF-8. I'll leave it to you to figure out why.
"We should forget about small efficiencies, say about 97% of the time: Premature quotation is the root of public humiliation."

Offline MortenMacFly

  • Administrator
  • Lives here!
  • *****
  • Posts: 9694
Re: C::B fails to start on Windows (Rev 4407)
« Reply #21 on: August 28, 2007, 01:59:25 pm »
I'll leave it to you to figure out why.
Biplab and I already figured out some possible crash candidates under such circumstances... ;-)
Compiler logging: Settings->Compiler & Debugger->tab "Other"->Compiler logging="Full command line"
C::B Manual: https://www.codeblocks.org/docs/main_codeblocks_en.html
C::B FAQ: https://wiki.codeblocks.org/index.php?title=FAQ

Offline Biplab

  • Developer
  • Lives here!
  • *****
  • Posts: 1874
    • Biplab's Blog
Re: C::B fails to start on Windows (Rev 4407)
« Reply #22 on: August 28, 2007, 02:19:29 pm »
I'll leave it to you to figure out why.
Biplab and I already figured out some possible crash candidates under such circumstances... ;-)

And, funnily, one such instance was when I tried to run it in safe mode!! ;)
Be a part of the solution, not a part of the problem.