Opened 11 years ago
Closed 7 years ago
#2325 closed defect (worksforme)
doLinearTearing should not appear in the debug flags
| Reported by: | Lennart Ochel | Owned by: | Lennart Ochel |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | high | Milestone: | 1.13.0 |
| Component: | Command Prompt Environment | Version: | trunk |
| Keywords: | Cc: | Adrian Pop, Patrick Täuber, Jens Frenkel, Martin Sjölund |
Description
The help text for the debugflaggs define those as: "The debug flag takes a comma-separated list of flags which are used by the compiler for debugging."
+d=doLinearTearing is not such a flag for debugging purpose so it should be removed from that list.
Probably this is also for other flags the case.
Change History (19)
comment:1 by , 11 years ago
| Owner: | changed from to |
|---|---|
| Status: | new → assigned |
comment:2 by , 11 years ago
| Resolution: | → fixed |
|---|---|
| Status: | assigned → closed |
comment:3 by , 11 years ago
Don't agree :) It's something that should always be done, or be a pre/postopt module. Else it's just experimental debugging if it doesn't really work, etc~
comment:4 by , 11 years ago
Well, I agree that it should be always enabled per default. Anyway this flag is not used for debugging purpose. It is just an experimental feature. Hence it is disabled and can be enabled using +linearTearing.
Hopefully it gets enabled per default very soon so that the flag can be completely removed. Should not be that difficult.
comment:5 by , 11 years ago
Well, experimental features belong with the debugging flags. The other flags are for mature things that users should to work very well.
comment:6 by , 11 years ago
If you think so, you can revert r16924 and change the debug-flag description. But I would like to distinguish experimental features from debugging purpose.
comment:7 by , 11 years ago
As the help text says, the debug flags are for debugging purpose. Hence I would expect that they are just additional outputs to trace the internal behavior and support the debugging process. Maybe we should introduce a new flag list for experimental features?
comment:8 by , 11 years ago
The help-text says experimental features, too (now). The majority of them are for experimental features anyway.
comment:9 by , 11 years ago
Why do we not split the flags into "debug" and "experimantal"? I think it a bit ugly to mix this.
comment:10 by , 11 years ago
Because it breaks backwards compatibility (and we are about to make a release) Maybe we can do it for 2.0
comment:11 by , 11 years ago
Okay, that sounds reasonable. So I will reintroduce +d=doLinearTearing and create a new ticket with milestone 2.0.0 to restructure the debug flags.
comment:12 by , 11 years ago
| Milestone: | 1.9.0 → 2.0.0 |
|---|---|
| Resolution: | fixed |
| Status: | closed → reopened |
This is reverted in r16929 and will be reintroduced after the next release to keep backwards compatibility for now.
comment:17 by , 8 years ago
| Milestone: | 1.11.0 → 1.12.0 |
|---|
Milestone moved to 1.12.0 due to 1.11.0 already being released.
comment:18 by , 7 years ago
| Milestone: | 1.12.0 → Future |
|---|
The milestone of this ticket has been reassigned to "Future".
If you think the issue is still valid and relevant for you, please select milestone 1.13.0 for back-end, code generation and run-time issues, or 2.0.0 for front-end issues.
If you are aware that the problem is no longer present, please select the milestone corresponding to the version of OMC you used to check that, and set the status to "worksforme".
In both cases, a short informative comment would be welcome.
comment:19 by , 7 years ago
| Milestone: | Future → 1.13.0 |
|---|---|
| Resolution: | → worksforme |
| Status: | reopened → closed |
This flag is no longer present among the debug flags as of v1.13.0-dev, see https://openmodelica.org/doc/OpenModelicaUsersGuide/latest/omchelptext.html#omcflag-debug-section
r16924