PureBasic Forums - English

Last night in 5.42 I encountered very strange and rare bug which I cannot reproduce (and don't know exact conditions) so just posting here.

It was like that:
1. I've opened IDE
2. Loaded project, did something, ran it several times, saved & closed
3. Opened another code file (not project), and here bug appeared

In following code string "pMin = " just MISSED from ReplaceString() return and only result of StrF was used, that happened both when running with debugger and in resulting exe.
I wasted 30min trying to find wtf is wrong with code, testing with all those purifiers and so on. And then I just restarted IDE and bug disappeared Does anyone exposed such case?
It looks to be some general compiler bug, not with ReplaceString() or StrF() or other library functions.

If you use OS X or Linux 64-bit it could be the same issue as this: http://www.purebasic.fr/english/viewtop ... 24&t=62842

I once had the same problem. It was just an assignment (stringVar.s = "a string"). It was not executed after compilation (with and without debugger).

After restart of IDE IT worked.
I never could reproduce it.

This happend on Windows 7 64 Bit.

Fred wrote:If you use OS X or Linux 64-bit it could be the same issue as this

No, that was on Win x86. No any crash or other visible errors, just few hardcoded strings (from a very many other hardcoded) were present in code and missing in executable. The StrF() return or other functions returns seems never missing, as I experimented with them when bug appeared.

helpy wrote:I once had the same problem. It was just an assignment (stringVar.s = "a string"). It was not executed after compilation (with and without debugger).

After restart of IDE IT worked.
I never could reproduce it.

This happend on Windows 7 64 Bit.

Yes, that looks like my case

Some rare times, with older 5.x versions I realized that some piece of code was not working properly. I tried to find out what was going on and when I was closing PB and ran it again, everything where back to normal. I was thinking that, maybe, I was loading something and I was not freeing it properly, but now I think it could be some sort of bug, as in some of these cases, the code was not doing something very "special" to have this behavior.

That could happens as we clean the compiler at every compile to not reload it from scratch and gain a few seconds. I would be interested to find a way to reproduce such issue, as it can be wierd to experience for sure.

@Fred:
as you know, with my editor (EPB)
I raise the compiler from scratch at each compilation
and frankly, we can not speak of "seconds"
I do not notice any particular downturn revive the compiler each time,
rather than leaving it in Ram ..

nowadays computers are anyway veloce, not to have this problem ...

******** in Froggy's ***************

comme tu le sais , avec mon Editeur (EPB)
je relance le compilateur a partir de zero a chaque compilation
et franchement, on ne peut pas parler de "secondes"
je ne note pas de ralentissement particulier a relancer le compilateur a chaque fois,
plutot que de le laisser en Ram ..

de nos jours les ordinateurs sont quand meme assez veloce, pour ne pas avoir ce probleme ...

I'll just up this topic, maybe there will be some more ppl encountered it?

For this time I already tried about 40 various scenario trying to reproduce that rare and really sneaky bug for interest, but all failed (5.42) ^^