3 Bugs can be reported on the help mailing list
4 sbcl-help@lists.sourceforge.net
5 or on the development mailing list
6 sbcl-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
8 Please include enough information in a bug report that someone reading
9 it can reproduce the problem, i.e. don't write
10 Subject: apparent bug in PRINT-OBJECT (or *PRINT-LENGTH*?)
11 PRINT-OBJECT doesn't seem to work with *PRINT-LENGTH*. Is this a bug?
13 Subject: apparent bug in PRINT-OBJECT (or *PRINT-LENGTH*?)
14 In sbcl-1.2.3 running under OpenBSD 4.5 on my Alpha box, when
15 I compile and load the file
16 (DEFSTRUCT (FOO (:PRINT-OBJECT (LAMBDA (X Y)
17 (LET ((*PRINT-LENGTH* 4))
20 then at the command line type
22 the program loops endlessly instead of printing the object.
27 There is also some information on bugs in the manual page and
28 in the TODO file. Eventually more such information may move here.
30 The gaps in the number sequence belong to old bug descriptions which
31 have gone away (typically because they were fixed, but sometimes for
32 other reasons, e.g. because they were moved elsewhere).
35 KNOWN BUGS OF NO SPECIAL CLASS:
38 DEFSTRUCT almost certainly should overwrite the old LAYOUT information
39 instead of just punting when a contradictory structure definition
40 is loaded. As it is, if you redefine DEFSTRUCTs in a way which
41 changes their layout, you probably have to rebuild your entire
42 program, even if you know or guess enough about the internals of
43 SBCL to wager that this (undefined in ANSI) operation would be safe.
46 ANSI specifies that a type mismatch in a structure slot
47 initialization value should not cause a warning.
49 This one might not be fixed for a while because while we're big
50 believers in ANSI compatibility and all, (1) there's no obvious
51 simple way to do it (short of disabling all warnings for type
52 mismatches everywhere), and (2) there's a good portable
53 workaround. ANSI justifies this specification by saying
54 The restriction against issuing a warning for type mismatches
55 between a slot-initform and the corresponding slot's :TYPE
56 option is necessary because a slot-initform must be specified
57 in order to specify slot options; in some cases, no suitable
59 In SBCL, as in CMU CL (or, for that matter, any compiler which
60 really understands Common Lisp types) a suitable default does
61 exist, in all cases, because the compiler understands the concept
62 of functions which never return (i.e. has return type NIL, e.g.
63 ERROR). Thus, as a portable workaround, you can use a call to
64 some known-never-to-return function as the default. E.g.
66 (BAR (ERROR "missing :BAR argument")
67 :TYPE SOME-TYPE-TOO-HAIRY-TO-CONSTRUCT-AN-INSTANCE-OF))
69 (DECLAIM (FTYPE () NIL) MISSING-ARG)
70 (DEFUN REQUIRED-ARG () ; workaround for SBCL non-ANSI slot init typing
71 (ERROR "missing required argument"))
73 (BAR (REQUIRED-ARG) :TYPE TRICKY-TYPE-OF-SOME-SORT)
74 (BLETCH (REQUIRED-ARG) :TYPE TRICKY-TYPE-OF-SOME-SORT)
75 (N-REFS-SO-FAR 0 :TYPE (INTEGER 0)))
76 Such code will compile without complaint and work correctly either
77 on SBCL or on a completely compliant Common Lisp system.
80 bogus warnings about undefined functions for magic functions like
81 SB!C::%%DEFUN and SB!C::%DEFCONSTANT when cross-compiling files
82 like src/code/float.lisp. Fixing this will probably require
83 straightening out enough bootstrap consistency issues that
84 the cross-compiler can run with *TYPE-SYSTEM-INITIALIZED*.
85 Instead, the cross-compiler runs in a slightly flaky state
86 which is sane enough to compile SBCL itself, but which is
87 also unstable in several ways, including its inability
88 to really grok function declarations.
91 The "byte compiling top-level form:" output ought to be condensed.
92 Perhaps any number of such consecutive lines ought to turn into a
93 single "byte compiling top-level forms:" line.
96 The handling of IGNORE declarations on lambda list arguments of
97 DEFMETHOD is at least weird, and in fact seems broken and useless.
98 I should fix up another layer of binding, declared IGNORABLE, for
99 typed lambda list arguments.
102 The way that the compiler munges types with arguments together
103 with types with no arguments (in e.g. TYPE-EXPAND) leads to
104 weirdness visible to the user:
105 (DEFTYPE FOO () 'FIXNUM)
107 (TYPEP 11 '(FOO)) => T, which seems weird
108 (TYPEP 11 'FIXNUM) => T
109 (TYPEP 11 '(FIXNUM)) signals an error, as it should
110 The situation is complicated by the presence of Common Lisp types
111 like UNSIGNED-BYTE (which can either be used in list form or alone)
112 so I'm not 100% sure that the behavior above is actually illegal.
113 But I'm 90+% sure, and someday perhaps I'll be motivated to look it up..
116 It would be nice if the
118 (during macroexpansion)
119 said what macroexpansion was at fault, e.g.
121 (during macroexpansion of IN-PACKAGE,
122 during macroexpansion of DEFFOO)
125 The type system doesn't understand the KEYWORD type very well:
126 (SUBTYPEP 'KEYWORD 'SYMBOL) => NIL, NIL
127 It might be possible to fix this by changing the definition of
128 KEYWORD to (AND SYMBOL (SATISFIES KEYWORDP)), but the type system
129 would need to be a bit smarter about AND types, too:
130 (SUBTYPEP '(AND SYMBOL KEYWORD) 'SYMBOL) => NIL, NIL
131 (The type system does know something about AND types already,
132 (SUBTYPEP '(AND INTEGER FLOAT) 'NUMBER) => T, T
133 (SUBTYPEP '(AND INTEGER FIXNUM) 'NUMBER) =>T, T
134 so likely this is a small patch.)
137 Floating point infinities are screwed up. [When I was converting CMU CL
138 to SBCL, I was looking for complexity to delete, and I thought it was safe
139 to just delete support for floating point infinities. It wasn't: they're
140 generated by the floating point hardware even when we remove support
141 for them in software. -- WHN] Support for them should be restored.
144 The ANSI syntax for non-STANDARD method combination types in CLOS is
145 (DEFGENERIC FOO (X) (:METHOD-COMBINATION PROGN))
146 (DEFMETHOD FOO PROGN ((X BAR)) (PRINT 'NUMBER))
147 If you mess this up, omitting the PROGN qualifier in in DEFMETHOD,
148 (DEFGENERIC FOO (X) (:METHOD-COMBINATION PROGN))
149 (DEFMETHOD FOO ((X BAR)) (PRINT 'NUMBER))
150 the error mesage is not easy to understand:
151 INVALID-METHOD-ERROR was called outside the dynamic scope
152 of a method combination function (inside the body of
153 DEFINE-METHOD-COMBINATION or a method on the generic
154 function COMPUTE-EFFECTIVE-METHOD).
155 It would be better if it were more informative, a la
156 The method combination type for this method (STANDARD) does
157 not match the method combination type for the generic function
159 Also, after you make the mistake of omitting the PROGN qualifier
160 on a DEFMETHOD, doing a new DEFMETHOD with the correct qualifier
162 (DEFMETHOD FOO PROGN ((X BAR)) (PRINT 'NUMBER))
164 INVALID-METHOD-ERROR was called outside the dynamic scope
165 of a method combination function (inside the body of
166 DEFINE-METHOD-COMBINATION or a method on the generic
167 function COMPUTE-EFFECTIVE-METHOD).
168 This is not very helpful..
171 (SUBTYPEP '(FUNCTION (T BOOLEAN) NIL)
172 '(FUNCTION (FIXNUM FIXNUM) NIL)) => T, T
173 (Also, when this is fixed, we can enable the code in PROCLAIM which
174 checks for incompatible FTYPE redeclarations.)
177 The ANSI spec says that CONS can be a compound type spec, e.g.
178 (CONS FIXNUM REAL). SBCL doesn't support this.
181 from DTC on the CMU CL mailing list 25 Feb 2000:
182 ;;; Compiler fails when this file is compiled.
184 ;;; Problem shows up in delete-block within ir1util.lisp. The assertion
185 ;;; (assert (member (functional-kind lambda) '(:let :mv-let :assignment)))
186 ;;; fails within bind node branch.
188 ;;; Note that if c::*check-consistency* is enabled then an un-reached
189 ;;; entry is also reported.
192 (declare (values nil))
209 (let ((ttt #'(lambda () (go cccc))))
210 (declare (special ttt))
211 (return-from bbbb nil))
214 (return-from bbbb nil))))))
217 (I *think* this is a bug. It certainly seems like strange behavior. But
218 the ANSI spec is scary, dark, and deep..)
219 (FORMAT NIL "~,1G" 1.4) => "1. "
220 (FORMAT NIL "~3,1G" 1.4) => "1. "
223 from Marco Antoniotti on cmucl-imp mailing list 1 Mar 2000:
225 (setf (find-class 'ccc1) (find-class 'ccc))
226 (defmethod zut ((c ccc1)) 123)
227 DTC's recommended workaround from the mailing list 3 Mar 2000:
228 (setf (pcl::find-class 'ccc1) (pcl::find-class 'ccc))
231 The ANSI spec, in section "22.3.5.2 Tilde Less-Than-Sign: Logical Block",
232 says that an error is signalled if ~W, ~_, ~<...~:>, ~I, or ~:T is used
233 inside "~<..~>" (without the colon modifier on the closing syntax).
234 However, SBCL doesn't do this:
235 * (FORMAT T "~<munge~wegnum~>" 12)
240 When too many files are opened, OPEN will fail with an
241 uninformative error message
242 error in function OPEN: error opening #P"/tmp/foo.lisp": NIL
243 instead of saying that too many files are open.
246 Right now, when COMPILE-FILE has a read error, it actually pops
247 you into the debugger before giving up on the file. It should
248 instead handle the error, perhaps issuing (and handling)
249 a secondary error "caught ERROR: unrecoverable error during compilation"
250 and then return with FAILURE-P true,
253 from CMU CL mailing list 01 May 2000
255 I realize I can take care of this by doing (proclaim (ignore pcl::.slots1.))
256 but seeing as .slots0. is not-exported, shouldn't it be ignored within the
260 In: DEFMETHOD FOO-BAR-BAZ (RESOURCE-TYPE)
261 (DEFMETHOD FOO-BAR-BAZ
262 ((SELF RESOURCE-TYPE))
263 (SETF (SLOT-VALUE SELF 'NAME) 3))
264 --> BLOCK MACROLET PCL::FAST-LEXICAL-METHOD-FUNCTIONS
265 --> PCL::BIND-FAST-LEXICAL-METHOD-MACROS MACROLET
266 --> PCL::BIND-LEXICAL-METHOD-FUNCTIONS LET PCL::BIND-ARGS LET* PCL::PV-BINDING
267 --> PCL::PV-BINDING1 PCL::PV-ENV LET
269 (LET ((PCL::.SLOTS0. #))
274 Warning: Variable PCL::.SLOTS0. defined but never used.
276 Compilation unit finished.
279 #<Standard-Method FOO-BAR-BAZ (RESOURCE-TYPE) {480918FD}>
282 reported by Sam Steingold on the cmucl-imp mailing list 12 May 2000:
284 Also, there is another bug: `array-displacement' should return an array
285 or nil as first value (as per ANSI CL), while CMUCL declares it as
286 returning an array as first value always.
289 Sometimes (SB-EXT:QUIT) fails with
290 Argh! maximum interrupt nesting depth (4096) exceeded, exiting
291 Process inferior-lisp exited abnormally with code 1
292 I haven't noticed a repeatable case of this yet.
295 some sort of bug in inlining and RETURN-FROM in sbcl-0.6.5: Compiling
298 (BLOCK USED-BY-SOME-Y?
301 (UNLESS (REJECTED? Y)
302 (RETURN-FROM USED-BY-SOME-Y? T)))))
303 (DECLARE (INLINE FROB))
308 error in function SB-KERNEL:ASSERT-ERROR:
309 The assertion (EQ (SB-C::CONTINUATION-KIND SB-C::CONT) :BLOCK-START) failed.
310 This is still present in sbcl-0.6.8.
313 In some cases the compiler believes type declarations on array
314 elements without checking them, e.g.
315 (DECLAIM (OPTIMIZE (SAFETY 3) (SPEED 1) (SPACE 1)))
318 (DECLARE (TYPE (SIMPLE-ARRAY CONS 1) X))
319 (WHEN (CONSP (AREF X 0))
321 (BAR (VECTOR (MAKE-FOO :A 11 :B 12)))
324 in SBCL 0.6.5 (and also in CMU CL 18b). This does not happen for
325 all cases, e.g. the type assumption *is* checked if the array
326 elements are declared to be of some structure type instead of CONS.
329 The printer doesn't report closures very well. This is true in
333 #<Closure Over Function "DEFUN STRUCTURE-SLOT-ACCESSOR" {134D1A1}>
334 It would be nice to make closures have a settable name slot,
335 and make things like DEFSTRUCT and FLET, which create closures,
336 set helpful values into this slot.
339 And as long as we're wishing, it would be awfully nice if INSPECT could
340 also report on closures, telling about the values of the bound variables.
343 as reported by Robert Strandh on the CMU CL mailing list 12 Jun 2000:
345 (defconstant +a-constant+ (make-instance 'a-class))
346 (defconstant +another-constant+ (vector +a-constant+))
348 CMU Common Lisp release x86-linux 2.4.19 8 February 2000 build 456,
351 Send bug reports and questions to your local CMU CL maintainer,
352 or to pvaneynd@debian.org
353 or to cmucl-help@cons.org. (prefered)
354 type (help) for help, (quit) to exit, and (demo) to see the demos
356 Python 1.0, target Intel x86
357 CLOS based on PCL version: September 16 92 PCL (f)
358 * (defclass a-class () ())
359 #<STANDARD-CLASS A-CLASS {48027BD5}>
360 * (compile-file "xx.lisp")
361 Python version 1.0, VM version Intel x86 on 12 JUN 00 08:12:55 am.
363 /home/strandh/Research/Functional/Common-Lisp/CLIM/Development/McCLIM
364 /xx.lisp 12 JUN 00 07:47:14 am
365 Compiling Load Time Value of (PCL::GET-MAKE-INSTANCE-FUNCTION-SYMBOL
367 Byte Compiling Top-Level Form:
368 Error in function C::DUMP-STRUCTURE: Attempt to dump invalid
370 #<A-CLASS {4803A5B5}>
374 The compiler assumes that any time a function of declared FTYPE
375 doesn't signal an error, its arguments were of the declared type.
376 E.g. compiling and loading
377 (DECLAIM (OPTIMIZE (SAFETY 3)))
378 (DEFUN FACTORIAL (X) (GAMMA (1+ X)))
379 (DECLAIM (FTYPE (FUNCTION (UNSIGNED-BYTE) FACTORIAL)))
381 (COND ((> (FACTORIAL X) 1.0E6)
382 (FORMAT T "too big~%"))
384 (FORMAT T "exactly ~S~%" (FACTORIAL X)))
386 (FORMAT T "approximately ~S~%" (FACTORIAL X)))))
389 will cause the INTEGERP case to be selected, giving bogus output a la
391 This violates the "declarations are assertions" principle.
392 According to the ANSI spec, in the section "System Class FUNCTION",
393 this is a case of "lying to the compiler", but the lying is done
394 by the code which calls FACTORIAL with non-UNSIGNED-BYTE arguments,
395 not by the unexpectedly general definition of FACTORIAL. In any case,
396 "declarations are assertions" means that lying to the compiler should
397 cause an error to be signalled, and should not cause a bogus
398 result to be returned. Thus, the compiler should not assume
399 that arbitrary functions check their argument types. (It might
400 make sense to add another flag (CHECKED?) to DEFKNOWN to
401 identify functions which *do* check their argument types.)
404 DEFMETHOD doesn't check the syntax of &REST argument lists properly,
405 accepting &REST even when it's not followed by an argument name:
406 (DEFMETHOD FOO ((X T) &REST) NIL)
409 On the CMU CL mailing list 26 June 2000, Douglas Crosher wrote
411 Hannu Rummukainen wrote:
413 > There's something weird going on with the compilation of the attached
414 > code. Compiling and loading the file in a fresh lisp, then invoking
416 Thanks for the bug report, nice to have this one fixed. It was a bug
417 in the x86 backend, the < VOP. A fix has been committed to the main
418 source, see the file compiler/x86/float.lisp.
420 Probably the same bug exists in SBCL.
423 TYPEP treats the result of UPGRADED-ARRAY-ELEMENT-TYPE as gospel,
424 so that (TYPEP (MAKE-ARRAY 3) '(VECTOR SOMETHING-NOT-DEFINED-YET))
425 returns (VALUES T T). Probably it should be an error instead,
426 complaining that the type SOMETHING-NOT-DEFINED-YET is not defined.
429 TYPEP of VALUES types is sometimes implemented very inefficiently, e.g. in
430 (DEFTYPE INDEXOID () '(INTEGER 0 1000))
432 (DECLARE (TYPE INDEXOID X))
433 (THE (VALUES INDEXOID)
435 where the implementation of the type check in function FOO
436 includes a full call to %TYPEP. There are also some fundamental problems
437 with the interpretation of VALUES types (inherited from CMU CL, and
438 from the ANSI CL standard) as discussed on the cmucl-imp@cons.org
439 mailing list, e.g. in Robert Maclachlan's post of 21 Jun 2000.
442 The definitions of SIGCONTEXT-FLOAT-REGISTER and
443 %SET-SIGCONTEXT-FLOAT-REGISTER in x86-vm.lisp say they're not
444 supported on FreeBSD because the floating point state is not saved,
445 but at least as of FreeBSD 4.0, the floating point state *is* saved,
446 so they could be supported after all. Very likely
447 SIGCONTEXT-FLOATING-POINT-MODES could now be supported, too.
450 (as discussed by Douglas Crosher on the cmucl-imp mailing list ca.
451 Aug. 10, 2000): CMUCL currently interprets 'member as '(member); same
452 issue with 'union, 'and, 'or etc. So even though according to the
453 ANSI spec, bare 'MEMBER, 'AND, and 'OR are not legal types, CMUCL
454 (and now SBCL) interpret them as legal types.
457 ANSI specifies DEFINE-SYMBOL-MACRO, but it's not defined in SBCL.
458 CMU CL added it ca. Aug 13, 2000, after some discussion on the mailing
459 list, and it is probably possible to use substantially the same
460 patches to add it to SBCL.
463 a slew of floating-point-related errors reported by Peter Van Eynde
465 a: (SQRT -9.0) fails, because SB-KERNEL::COMPLEX-SQRT is undefined.
466 Similarly, COMPLEX-ASIN, COMPLEX-ACOS, COMPLEX-ACOSH, and others
468 b: SBCL's value for LEAST-POSITIVE-SHORT-FLOAT is bogus, and
469 should probably be 1.4012985e-45. In SBCL,
470 (/ LEAST-POSITIVE-SHORT-FLOAT 2) returns a number smaller
471 than LEAST-POSITIVE-SHORT-FLOAT. Similar problems
472 exist for LEAST-NEGATIVE-SHORT-FLOAT, LEAST-POSITIVE-LONG-FLOAT,
473 and LEAST-NEGATIVE-LONG-FLOAT.
474 c: Many expressions generate floating infinity:
479 PVE's regression tests want them to raise errors. SBCL
480 generates the infinities instead, which may or may not be
481 conforming behavior, but then blow it by being unable to
482 output the infinities, since support for infinities is generally
483 broken, and in particular SB-IMPL::OUTPUT-FLOAT-INFINITY is
485 d: (in section12.erg) various forms a la
486 (FLOAT 1 DOUBLE-FLOAT-EPSILON)
487 don't give the right behavior.
490 type safety errors reported by Peter Van Eynde July 25, 2000:
491 a: (COERCE (QUOTE (A B C)) (QUOTE (VECTOR * 4)))
493 In general lengths of array type specifications aren't
494 checked by COERCE, so it fails when the spec is
495 (VECTOR 4), (STRING 2), (SIMPLE-BIT-VECTOR 3), or whatever.
496 b: CONCATENATE has the same problem of not checking the length
497 of specified output array types. MAKE-SEQUENCE and MAP and
498 MERGE also have the same problem.
499 c: (COERCE 'AND 'FUNCTION) returns something related to
500 (MACRO-FUNCTION 'AND), but ANSI says it should raise an error.
501 d: ELT signals SIMPLE-ERROR if its index argument
502 isn't a valid index for its sequence argument, but should
503 signal TYPE-ERROR instead.
504 e: FILE-LENGTH is supposed to signal a type error when its
505 argument is not a stream associated with a file, but doesn't.
506 f: (FLOAT-RADIX 2/3) should signal an error instead of
508 g: (LOAD "*.lsp") should signal FILE-ERROR.
509 h: (MAKE-CONCATENATED-STREAM (MAKE-STRING-OUTPUT-STREAM))
510 should signal TYPE-ERROR.
511 i: MAKE-TWO-WAY-STREAM doesn't check that its arguments can
512 be used for input and output as needed. It should fail with
513 TYPE-ERROR when handed e.g. the results of
514 MAKE-STRING-INPUT-STREAM or MAKE-STRING-OUTPUT-STREAM in
515 the inappropriate positions, but doesn't.
516 j: (PARSE-NAMESTRING (COERCE (LIST #\f #\o #\o (CODE-CHAR 0) #\4 #\8)
518 should probably signal an error instead of making a pathname with
520 k: READ-BYTE is supposed to signal TYPE-ERROR when its argument is
521 not a binary input stream, but instead cheerfully reads from
522 character streams, e.g. (MAKE-STRING-INPUT-STREAM "abc").
525 DEFCLASS bugs reported by Peter Van Eynde July 25, 2000:
526 a: (DEFCLASS FOO () (A B A)) should signal a PROGRAM-ERROR, and
528 b: (DEFCLASS FOO () (A B A) (:DEFAULT-INITARGS X A X B)) should
529 signal a PROGRAM-ERROR, and doesn't.
530 c: (DEFCLASS FOO07 NIL ((A :ALLOCATION :CLASS :ALLOCATION :CLASS))),
531 and other DEFCLASS forms with duplicate specifications in their
532 slots, should signal a PROGRAM-ERROR, and doesn't.
533 d: (DEFGENERIC IF (X)) should signal a PROGRAM-ERROR, but instead
534 causes a COMPILER-ERROR.
537 SYMBOL-MACROLET bugs reported by Peter Van Eynde July 25, 2000:
538 a: (SYMBOL-MACROLET ((T TRUE)) ..) should probably signal
539 PROGRAM-ERROR, but SBCL accepts it instead.
540 b: SYMBOL-MACROLET should refuse to bind something which is
541 declared as a global variable, signalling PROGRAM-ERROR.
542 c: SYMBOL-MACROLET should signal PROGRAM-ERROR if something
543 it binds is declared SPECIAL inside.
546 LOOP bugs reported by Peter Van Eynde July 25, 2000:
547 a: (LOOP WITH (A B) DO (PRINT 1)) is a syntax error according to
548 the definition of WITH clauses given in the ANSI spec, but
549 compiles and runs happily in SBCL.
550 b: a messy one involving package iteration:
551 interpreted Form: (LET ((PACKAGE (MAKE-PACKAGE "LOOP-TEST"))) (INTERN "blah" PACKAGE) (LET ((BLAH2 (INTERN "blah2" PACKAGE))) (EXPORT BLAH2 PACKAGE)) (LIST (SORT (LOOP FOR SYM BEING EACH PRESENT-SYMBOL OF PACKAGE FOR SYM-NAME = (SYMBOL-NAME SYM) COLLECT SYM-NAME) (FUNCTION STRING<)) (SORT (LOOP FOR SYM BEING EACH EXTERNAL-SYMBOL OF PACKAGE FOR SYM-NAME = (SYMBOL-NAME SYM) COLLECT SYM-NAME) (FUNCTION STRING<))))
552 Should be: (("blah" "blah2") ("blah2"))
553 SBCL: (("blah") ("blah2"))
554 * (LET ((X 1)) (LOOP FOR I BY (INCF X) FROM X TO 10 COLLECT I))
555 doesn't work -- SBCL's LOOP says BY isn't allowed in a FOR clause.
558 type system errors reported by Peter Van Eynde July 25, 2000:
559 a: (SUBTYPEP 'BIGNUM 'INTEGER) => NIL, NIL
560 but should be (VALUES T T) instead.
561 b: (SUBTYPEP 'EXTENDED-CHAR 'CHARACTER) => NIL, NIL
562 but should be (VALUES T T) instead.
563 c: (SUBTYPEP '(INTEGER (0) (0)) 'NIL) dies with nested errors.
564 d: In general, the system doesn't like '(INTEGER (0) (0)) -- it
565 blows up at the level of SPECIFIER-TYPE with
566 "Lower bound (0) is greater than upper bound (0)." Probably
567 SPECIFIER-TYPE should return NIL instead.
568 e: (TYPEP 0 '(COMPLEX (EQL 0)) fails with
569 "Component type for Complex is not numeric: (EQL 0)."
570 This might be easy to fix; the type system already knows
571 that (SUBTYPEP '(EQL 0) 'NUMBER) is true.
572 f: The type system doesn't know about the condition system,
573 so that e.g. (TYPEP 'SIMPLE-ERROR 'ERROR)=>NIL.
574 g: The type system isn't all that smart about relationships
575 between hairy types, as shown in the type.erg test results,
576 e.g. (SUBTYPEP 'CONS '(NOT ATOM)) => NIL, NIL.
579 miscellaneous errors reported by Peter Van Eynde July 25, 2000:
581 (DEFGENERIC FOO02 (X))
582 (DEFMETHOD FOO02 ((X NUMBER)) T)
583 (LET ((M (FIND-METHOD (FUNCTION FOO02)
585 (LIST (FIND-CLASS (QUOTE NUMBER))))))
586 (REMOVE-METHOD (FUNCTION FOO02) M)
587 (DEFGENERIC FOO03 (X))
588 (ADD-METHOD (FUNCTION FOO03) M)))
589 should give an error, but SBCL allows it.
590 b: READ should probably return READER-ERROR, not the bare
591 arithmetic error, when input a la "1/0" or "1e1000" causes
595 It has been reported (e.g. by Peter Van Eynde) that there are
596 several metaobject protocol "errors". (In order to fix them, we might
597 need to document exactly what metaobject protocol specification
598 we're following -- the current code is just inherited from PCL.)
601 another error from Peter Van Eynde 5 September 2000:
602 (FORMAT NIL "~F" "FOO") should work, but instead reports an error.
603 PVE submitted a patch to deal with this bug, but it exposes other
604 comparably serious bugs, so I didn't apply it. It looks as though
605 the FORMAT code needs a fair amount of rewriting in order to comply
606 with the various details of the ANSI spec.
609 The implementation of #'+ returns its single argument without
610 type checking, e.g. (+ "illegal") => "illegal".
613 In sbcl-0.6.7, there is no doc string for CL:PUSH, probably
614 because it's defined with the DEFMACRO-MUNDANELY macro and something
615 is wrong with doc string setting in that macro.
618 Attempting to use COMPILE on something defined by DEFMACRO fails:
619 (DEFMACRO FOO (X) (CONS X X))
621 Error in function C::GET-LAMBDA-TO-COMPILE:
622 #<Closure Over Function "DEFUN (SETF MACRO-FUNCTION)" {480E21B1}> was defined in a non-null environment.
625 (SUBTYPEP '(AND ZILCH INTEGER) 'ZILCH)
629 CL:*DEFAULT-PATHNAME-DEFAULTS* doesn't behave as ANSI suggests (reflecting
630 current working directory). And there's no supported way to update
631 or query the current working directory (a la Unix "chdir" and "pwd"),
632 which is functionality that ILISP needs (and currently gets with low-level
636 The debugger LIST-LOCATIONS command doesn't work properly.
639 Compiling and loading
640 (DEFUN FAIL (X) (THROW 'FAIL-TAG X))
642 then requesting a BACKTRACE at the debugger prompt gives no information
643 about where in the user program the problem occurred.
646 The compiler is supposed to do type inference well enough that
649 ((SIMPLE-ARRAY SINGLE-FLOAT)
651 (DECLARE (TYPE (SIMPLE-ARRAY SINGLE-FLOAT) X))
654 is redundant. However, as reported by Juan Jose Garcia Ripoll for
655 CMU CL, it sometimes doesn't. Adding declarations is a pretty good
656 workaround for the problem for now, but can't be done by the TYPECASE
657 macros themselves, since it's too hard for the macro to detect
658 assignments to the variable within the clause.
659 Note: The compiler *is* smart enough to do the type inference in
660 many cases. This case, derived from a couple of MACROEXPAND-1
661 calls on Ripoll's original test case,
663 (DECLARE (OPTIMIZE SPEED (SAFETY 0)))
664 (COND ((TYPEP A '(SIMPLE-ARRAY SINGLE-FLOAT)) NIL
665 (LET ((LENGTH (ARRAY-TOTAL-SIZE A)))
666 (LET ((I 0) (G2554 LENGTH))
667 (DECLARE (TYPE REAL G2554) (TYPE REAL I))
670 (WHEN (>= I G2554) (GO SB-LOOP::END-LOOP))
671 (SETF (ROW-MAJOR-AREF A I) (- (ROW-MAJOR-AREF A I)))
672 (GO SB-LOOP::NEXT-LOOP)
673 SB-LOOP::END-LOOP))))))
674 demonstrates the problem; but the problem goes away if the TAGBODY
675 and GO forms are removed (leaving the SETF in ordinary, non-looping
676 code), or if the TAGBODY and GO forms are retained, but the
677 assigned value becomes 0.0 instead of (- (ROW-MAJOR-AREF A I)).
680 Paul Werkowski wrote on cmucl-imp@cons.org 2000-11-15
681 I am looking into this problem that showed up on the cmucl-help
682 list. It seems to me that the "implementation specific environment
683 hacking functions" found in pcl/walker.lisp are completely messed
684 up. The good thing is that they appear to be barely used within
685 PCL and the munged environment object is passed to cmucl only
686 in calls to macroexpand-1, which is probably why this case fails.
687 SBCL uses essentially the same code, so if the environment hacking
688 is screwed up, it affects us too.
691 Using the pretty-printer from the command prompt gives funny
692 results, apparently because the pretty-printer doesn't know
693 about user's command input, including the user's carriage return
694 that the user, and therefore the pretty-printer thinks that
695 the new output block should start indented 2 or more characters
696 rightward of the correct location.
699 (probably related to bug #70)
700 As reported by Carl Witty on submit@bugs.debian.org 1999-05-08,
702 (in-package "CL-USER")
703 (defun equal-terms (termx termy)
705 ((alpha-equal-bound-term-lists (listx listy)
706 (or (and (null listx) (null listy))
708 (let ((bindings-x (bindings-of-bound-term (car listx)))
709 (bindings-y (bindings-of-bound-term (car listy))))
710 (if (and (null bindings-x) (null bindings-y))
711 (alpha-equal-terms (term-of-bound-term (car listx))
712 (term-of-bound-term (car listy)))
713 (and (= (length bindings-x) (length bindings-y))
715 (enter-binding-pairs (bindings-of-bound-term (car listx))
716 (bindings-of-bound-term (car listy)))
717 (alpha-equal-terms (term-of-bound-term (car listx))
718 (term-of-bound-term (car listy)))
719 (exit-binding-pairs (bindings-of-bound-term (car listx))
720 (bindings-of-bound-term (car listy)))))))
721 (alpha-equal-bound-term-lists (cdr listx) (cdr listy)))))
723 (alpha-equal-terms (termx termy)
724 (if (and (variable-p termx)
726 (equal-bindings (id-of-variable-term termx)
727 (id-of-variable-term termy))
728 (and (equal-operators-p (operator-of-term termx) (operator-of-term termy))
729 (alpha-equal-bound-term-lists (bound-terms-of-term termx)
730 (bound-terms-of-term termy))))))
734 (with-variable-invocation (alpha-equal-terms termx termy))))))
735 causes an assertion failure
736 The assertion (EQ (C::LAMBDA-TAIL-SET C::CALLER)
737 (C::LAMBDA-TAIL-SET (C::LAMBDA-HOME C::CALLEE))) failed.
739 Bob Rogers reports (1999-07-28 on cmucl-imp@cons.org) a smaller test
740 case with the same problem:
741 (defun parse-fssp-alignment ()
742 ;; Given an FSSP alignment file named by the argument . . .
743 (labels ((get-fssp-char ()
747 ;; Stub body, enough to tickle the bug.
748 (list (read-fssp-char)
752 ANSI specifies that the RESULT-TYPE argument of CONCATENATE must be
753 a subtype of SEQUENCE, but CONCATENATE doesn't check this properly:
754 (CONCATENATE 'SIMPLE-ARRAY #(1 2) '(3)) => #(1 2 3)
755 This also leads to funny behavior when derived type specifiers
756 are used, as originally reported by Milan Zamazal for CMU CL (on the
757 Debian bugs mailing list (?) 2000-02-27), then reported by Martin
758 Atzmueller for SBCL (2000-10-01 on sbcl-devel@lists.sourceforge.net):
759 (DEFTYPE FOO () 'SIMPLE-ARRAY)
760 (CONCATENATE 'FOO #(1 2) '(3))
761 => #<ARRAY-TYPE SIMPLE-ARRAY> is a bad type specifier for
763 The derived type specifier FOO should act the same way as the
764 built-in type SIMPLE-ARRAY here, but it doesn't. That problem
765 doesn't seem to exist for sequence types:
766 (DEFTYPE BAR () 'SIMPLE-VECTOR)
767 (CONCATENATE 'BAR #(1 2) '(3)) => #(1 2 3)
770 As reported by Winton Davies on a CMU CL mailing list 2000-01-10,
771 and reported for SBCL by Martin Atzmueller 2000-10-20: (TRACE GETHASH)
772 crashes SBCL. In general tracing anything which is used in the
773 implementation of TRACE is likely to have the same problem.
776 As reported by Daniel Solaz on cmucl-help@cons.org 2000-11-23,
777 SXHASH returns the same value for all non-STRUCTURE-OBJECT instances,
778 notably including all PCL instances. There's a limit to how much
779 SXHASH can do to return unique values for instances, but at least
780 it should probably look at the class name, the way that it does
781 for STRUCTURE-OBJECTs.
784 As reported by Martin Atzmueller on the sbcl-devel list 2000-11-22,
785 > There remains one issue, that is a bug in SBCL:
786 > According to my interpretation of the spec, the ":" and "@" modifiers
787 > should appear _after_ the comma-seperated arguments.
788 > Well, SBCL (and CMUCL for that matter) accept
789 > (ASSERT (STRING= (FORMAT NIL "~:8D" 1) " 1"))
790 > where the correct way (IMHO) should be
791 > (ASSERT (STRING= (FORMAT NIL "~8:D" 1) " 1"))
792 Probably SBCL should stop accepting the "~:8D"-style format arguments,
793 or at least issue a warning.
796 (probably related to bug #65)
797 The compiler doesn't like &OPTIONAL arguments in LABELS and FLET
799 (DEFUN FIND-BEFORE (ITEM SEQUENCE &KEY (TEST #'EQL))
800 (LABELS ((FIND-ITEM (OBJ SEQ TEST &OPTIONAL (VAL NIL))
801 (LET ((ITEM (FIRST SEQ)))
804 ((FUNCALL TEST OBJ ITEM)
807 (FIND-ITEM OBJ (REST SEQ) TEST (NCONC VAL `(,ITEM))))))))
808 (FIND-ITEM ITEM SEQUENCE TEST)))
809 from David Young's bug report on cmucl-help@cons.org 30 Nov 2000
810 causes sbcl-0.6.9 to fail with
811 error in function SB-KERNEL:ASSERT-ERROR:
812 The assertion (EQ (SB-C::LAMBDA-TAIL-SET SB-C::CALLER)
813 (SB-C::LAMBDA-TAIL-SET
814 (SB-C::LAMBDA-HOME SB-C::CALLEE))) failed.
817 (DECLAIM (OPTIMIZE ..)) doesn't work. E.g. even after
818 (DECLAIM (OPTIMIZE (SPEED 3))), things are still optimized with
819 the previous SPEED policy. This bug will probably get fixed in
820 0.6.9.x in a general cleanup of optimization policy.
823 (DECLAIM (OPTIMIZE ..)) doesn't work properly inside LOCALLY forms.
826 As noted in the ANSI specification for COERCE, (COERCE 3 'COMPLEX)
827 gives a result which isn't COMPLEX. The result type optimizer
828 for COERCE doesn't know this, perhaps because it was written before
829 ANSI threw this curveball: the optimizer thinks that COERCE always
830 returns a result of the specified type. Thus while the interpreted
832 (DEFUN TRICKY (X) (TYPEP (COERCE X 'COMPLEX) 'COMPLEX))
833 returns the correct result,
835 the compiled function
841 As reported by Martin Atzmueller on sbcl-devel 26 Dec 2000,
842 ANSI says that WITH-OUTPUT-TO-STRING should have a keyword
843 :ELEMENT-TYPE, but in sbcl-0.6.9 this is not defined for
844 WITH-OUTPUT-TO-STRING.
847 KNOWN BUGS RELATED TO THE IR1 INTERPRETER
849 (Note: At some point, the pure interpreter (actually a semi-pure
850 interpreter aka "the IR1 interpreter") will probably go away, replaced
852 (DEFUN EVAL (X) (FUNCALL (COMPILE NIL (LAMBDA ..)))))
853 and at that time these bugs should either go away automatically or
854 become more tractable to fix. Until then, they'll probably remain,
855 since some of them aren't considered urgent, and the rest are too hard
856 to fix as long as so many special cases remain. After the IR1
857 interpreter goes away is also the preferred time to start
858 systematically exterminating cases where debugging functionality
859 (backtrace, breakpoint, etc.) breaks down, since getting rid of the
860 IR1 interpreter will reduce the number of special cases we need to
864 The FUNCTION special operator doesn't check properly whether its
865 argument is a function name. E.g. (FUNCTION (X Y)) returns a value
866 instead of failing with an error. (Later attempting to funcall the
867 value does cause an error.)
870 COMPILED-FUNCTION-P bogusly reports T for interpreted functions:
871 * (DEFUN FOO (X) (- 12 X))
873 * (COMPILED-FUNCTION-P #'FOO)
878 (DEFVAR *SUPPRESS-P* T)
879 (EVAL '(UNLESS *SUPPRESS-P*
880 (EVAL-WHEN (:COMPILE-TOPLEVEL :LOAD-TOPLEVEL :EXECUTE)
881 (FORMAT T "surprise!"))))
882 prints "surprise!". Probably the entire EVAL-WHEN mechanism ought to be
883 rewritten from scratch to conform to the ANSI definition, abandoning
884 the *ALREADY-EVALED-THIS* hack which is used in sbcl-0.6.8.9 (and
885 in the original CMU CL source, too). This should be easier to do --
886 though still nontrivial -- once the various IR1 interpreter special
890 EVAL-WHEN's idea of what's a toplevel form is even more screwed up
891 than the example in IR1-3 would suggest, since COMPILE-FILE and
892 COMPILE both print both "right now!" messages when compiling the
896 (EVAL-WHEN (:COMPILE-TOPLEVEL :LOAD-TOPLEVEL :EXECUTE)
897 (PRINT "yes! right now!"))
900 (EVAL-WHEN (:COMPILE-TOPLEVEL :LOAD-TOPLEVEL :EXECUTE)
901 (PRINT "no! right now!"))
903 and while EVAL doesn't print the "right now!" messages, the first
904 FUNCALL on the value returned by EVAL causes both of them to be printed.
907 The system accepts DECLAIM in most places where DECLARE would be
908 accepted, without even issuing a warning. ANSI allows this, but since
909 it's fairly easy to mistype DECLAIM instead of DECLARE, and the
910 meaning is rather different, and it's unlikely that the user
911 has a good reason for doing DECLAIM not at top level, it would be
912 good to issue a STYLE-WARNING when this happens. A possible
913 fix would be to issue STYLE-WARNINGs for DECLAIMs not at top level,
914 or perhaps to issue STYLE-WARNINGs for any EVAL-WHEN not at top level.
915 [This is considered an IR1-interpreter-related bug because until
916 EVAL-WHEN is rewritten, which won't happen until after the IR1
917 interpreter is gone, the system's notion of what's a top-level form
918 and what's not will remain too confused to fix this problem.]