Roberto Bagnara wrote:
You are right: I am not familiar with DO-178B certification.
Fair enough, but it means you should never use avionics code
as an example in such discussions. No life has ever been lost
due to a software bug in the realm of commercial aviation, and
that was not achieved by trusting compilers to be bug free.
Yes, it's a bug, is it a serious bug, no? Will real software
be affected? no. Indeed I find any program that actually
does this remainder operation in practice to be highly
suspect.
But I am not wrong if I say that a bug is a bug and must be fixed.
must be fixed
never means more than "may be fixed if someone either gets
enthusiastic enough to do it themselves, or is paid to fix it."
Of course serious bugs usually fall into one of these categories
in a reasonable time period.
