Skip to content

Port DevCom bugs to GitHub #939

@StephanTLavavej

Description

@StephanTLavavej

As part of our work to migrate all STL development to GitHub, we're porting our Microsoft-internal bug database ("VSO"; originally Visual Studio Online, renamed Azure DevOps and Azure Boards) to GitHub issues. Some bugs were directly filed in VSO (by STL maintainers and other people within MS, sometimes on behalf of customers), while some were replicated from Developer Community ("DevCom").

As part of this porting process, we aren't resolving any bugs. The intended goal is for GitHub to be the source of truth for all bug reports (in addition to performance/enhancement/etc. suggestions); it's also our preferred place for new issues to be filed. (Issues filed on GitHub aren't replicated anywhere else, so it's the most convenient for us.) However, users who filed DevCom bugs in the past (or continue to file them in the future) will have their bugs remain active, and will receive feedback from STL maintainers there (in addition to their bugs being ported to GitHub issues where they can be linked to pull requests etc.). Additionally, VSO bugs (whether filed directly or replicated from DevCom) will remain active because our bosses and boss-like entities prefer that.

"Porting" a bug to GitHub involves capturing the true essence of the bug report, without distorting or over-simplifying it. (Much like compiler bugs, STL bugs can be very sensitive to the exact code, compiler options, etc. used.) However, we also want our GitHub issues to be readable and comprehensible, so that both maintainers and contributors can understand what's wrong and easily investigate a fix. So, when possible, it's nice to clean up the title and test case, so that they're as clear and minimal as possible. (It is often a good idea to have an "original repro" and "reduced repro", to avoid the dangers of over-simplifying away something important - and I speak as someone who has over-simplified a dozen compiler bug reports in the past.) It's better to err on the side of less cleanup than more - fixing only grammatical issues is fine.

Example bugs ported from DevCom: GH-371 (from DevCom-758960) and GH-503 (from DevCom-371962)

While only the STL maintainers will be able to port the MS-internal bugs that were directly filed in VSO, the DevCom database is publicly viewable, so we could use some help with those bugs. 😸

Here's a list of the DevCom bugs, along with their VSO IDs and Titles. (Sometimes, multiple DevCom bugs were linked to a single VSO bug, when we had a strong belief that they're all duplicates.) I generated this by hand, so if anything looks wrong (e.g. mismatched VSO/DevCom bugs), please let me know. Note that everyone in this repo has the ability to use our Custom Autolinks in GitHub issues/comments; you can just say DevCom-NNN instead of copying a whole URL.

In general, we have already tried to resolve clearly-invalid bugs, and obvious duplicates, but there are several categories of possible duplicates that we haven't resolved because there may be multiple underlying issues.

Finally, in addition to the title and repro, ported bugs should mention the DevCom and VSO IDs, so we can easily navigate to the linked bugs:

Also tracked by DevCom-publicnumber and VSO-internalnumber / AB#internalnumber.

AB followed by # (not - like other autolinks) will activate automation: your issue will be automatically edited by @msalehmsft to add a hyperlink (it won't appear in a Preview), and the internal bug will gain a special link. This must be mentioned in the original issue to create the internal link; using this syntax in issue comments below will be hyperlinked from GitHub, but not to GitHub.

Please don't use AB#nnn syntax here, in this thread as it will link "Port DevCom bugs to GitHub" to whatever's mentioned. DevCom-nnn and VSO-nnn are safe to mention anywhere.

🪲 Remaining: VSO ID | DevCom ID(s) | Original VSO Title

  • All done!

⏳ In Progress

  • None.

⚠️ Blocked

  • Let us know if anything simply can't be ported due to test cases in non-public attachments, descriptions that don't make sense, etc. We'll handle these bugs separately.
  • Non-public attachments:
    • VSO-238123 | DevCom-189336 | <iomanip>: std::get_time cause Debug Assertion Failed when the second parameter have extra delimiter
    • VSO-275595 | DevCom-246257 | <regex>: Instantiating std::regex("meow") changes output of strftime in a different thread
    • VSO-406125 | DevCom-246250 | <iomanip>: std::get_time does not report fail on an invalid date
  • Non-public screenshots:
  • Needs extra attention, see linked comments below:

❌ Resolved As Invalid

🛠️ Compiler Bug, Reduced To Library-Free Test Case And Sent To Compiler Team

😸 Fixed

✔️ Done

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    documentationRelated to documentation or commentsresolvedSuccessfully resolved without a commit

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions