+377: Memory fault error reporting
+ On those architectures where :C-STACK-IS-CONTROL-STACK is in
+ *FEATURES*, we handle SIG_MEMORY_FAULT (SEGV or BUS) on an altstack,
+ so we cannot handle the signal directly (as in interrupt_handle_now())
+ in the case when the signal comes from some external agent (the user
+ using kill(1), or a fault in some foreign code, for instance). As
+ of sbcl-0.8.20.20, this is fixed by calling
+ arrange_return_to_lisp_function() to a new error-signalling
+ function, but as a result the error reporting is poor: we cannot
+ even tell the user at which address the fault occurred. We should
+ arrange such that arguments can be passed to the function called from
+ arrange_return_to_lisp_function(), but this looked hard to do in
+ general without suffering from memory leaks.
+
+379: TRACE :ENCAPSULATE NIL broken on ppc/darwin
+ See commented-out test-case in debug.impure.lisp.
+
+380: Accessor redefinition fails because of old accessor name
+ When redefining an accessor, SB-PCL::FIX-SLOT-ACCESSORS may try to
+ find the generic function named by the old accessor name using
+ ENSURE-GENERIC-FUNCTION and then remove the old accessor's method in
+ the GF. If the old name does not name a function, or if the old name
+ does not name a generic function, no attempt to find the GF or remove
+ any methods is made.
+
+ However, if an unrelated GF with an incompatible lambda list exists,
+ the class redefinition will fail when SB-PCL::REMOVE-READER-METHOD
+ tries to find and remove a method with an incompatible lambda list
+ from the unrelated generic function.
+
+381: incautious calls to EQUAL in fasl dumping
+ Compiling
+ (frob #(#1=(a #1#)))
+ (frob #(#1=(b #1#)))
+ (frob #(#1=(a #1#)))
+ in sbcl-0.9.0 causes CONTROL-STACK-EXHAUSTED. My (WHN) impression
+ is that this follows from the use of (MAKE-HASH-TABLE :TEST 'EQUAL)
+ to detect sharing, in which case fixing it might require either
+ getting less ambitious about detecting shared list structure, or
+ implementing the moral equivalent of EQUAL hash tables in a
+ cycle-tolerant way.
+
+382: externalization unexpectedly changes array simplicity
+ COMPILE-FILE and LOAD
+ (defun foo ()
+ (let ((x #.(make-array 4 :fill-pointer 0)))
+ (values (eval `(typep ',x 'simple-array))
+ (typep x 'simple-array))))
+ then (FOO) => T, NIL.
+
+ Similar problems exist with SIMPLE-ARRAY-P, ARRAY-HEADER accessors
+ and all array dimension functions.
+
+383: ASH'ing non-constant zeros
+ Compiling
+ (lambda (b)
+ (declare (type (integer -2 14) b))
+ (declare (ignorable b))
+ (ash (imagpart b) 57))
+ on PPC (and other platforms, presumably) gives an error during the
+ emission of FASH-ASH-LEFT/FIXNUM=>FIXNUM as the assembler attempts to
+ stuff a too-large constant into the immediate field of a PPC
+ instruction. Either the VOP should be fixed or the compiler should be
+ taught how to transform this case away, paying particular attention
+ to side-effects that might occur in the arguments to ASH.
+
+384: Compiler runaway on very large character types
+
+ (compile nil '(lambda (x)
+ (declare (type (member #\a 1) x))
+ (the (member 1 nil) x)))
+
+ The types apparently normalize into a very large type, and the compiler
+ gets lost in REMOVE-DUPLICATES. Perhaps the latter should use
+ a better algorithm (one based on hash tables, say) on very long lists
+ when :TEST has its default value?
+
+ A simpler example:
+
+ (compile nil '(lambda (x) (the (not (eql #\a)) x)))
+
+ (partially fixed in 0.9.3.1, but a better representation for these
+ types is needed.)
+
+385:
+ (format nil "~4,1F" 0.001) => "0.00" (should be " 0.0");
+ (format nil "~4,1@F" 0.001) => "+.00" (should be "+0.0").
+
+386: SunOS/x86 stack exhaustion handling broken
+ According to <http://alfa.s145.xrea.com/sbcl/solaris-x86.html>, the
+ stack exhaustion checking (implemented with a write-protected guard
+ page) does not work on SunOS/x86.
+
+387:
+ 12:10 < jsnell> the package-lock test is basically due to a change in the test
+ behaviour when you install a handler for error around it. I
+ thought I'd disabled the test for now, but apparently that was
+ my imagination
+ 12:19 < Xophe> jsnell: ah, I see the problem in the package-locks stuff
+ 12:19 < Xophe> it's the same problem as we had with compiler-error conditions
+ 12:19 < Xophe> the thing that's signalled up and down the stack is a subtype of
+ ERROR, where it probably shouldn't be
+
+388:
+ (found by Dmitry Bogomolov)
+
+ (defclass foo () ((x :type (unsigned-byte 8))))
+ (defclass bar () ((x :type symbol)))
+ (defclass baz (foo bar) ())
+
+ causes error
+
+ SB-PCL::SPECIALIZER-APPLICABLE-USING-TYPE-P cannot handle the second argument
+ (UNSIGNED-BYTE 8).
+
+ [ Can't trigger this any more, as of 2006-08-07 ]
+
+389:
+ (reported several times on sbcl-devel, by Rick Taube, Brian Rowe and
+ others)
+
+ ROUND-NUMERIC-BOUND assumes that float types always have a FORMAT
+ specifying whether they're SINGLE or DOUBLE. This is true for types
+ computed by the type system itself, but the compiler type derivation
+ short-circuits this and constructs non-canonical types. A temporary
+ fix was made to ROUND-NUMERIC-BOUND for the sbcl-0.9.6 release, but
+ the right fix is to remove the abstraction violation in the
+ compiler's type deriver.
+
+393: Wrong error from methodless generic function
+ (DEFGENERIC FOO (X))
+ (FOO 1 2)
+ gives NO-APPLICABLE-METHOD rather than an argument count error.
+
+395: Unicode and streams
+ One of the remaining problems in SBCL's Unicode support is the lack
+ of generality in certain streams.
+ a. FILL-POINTER-STREAMs: SBCL refuses to write (e.g. using FORMAT)
+ to streams made from strings that aren't character strings with
+ fill-pointers:
+ (let ((v (make-array 5 :fill-pointer 0 :element-type 'standard-char)))
+ (format v "foo")
+ v)
+ should return a non-simple base string containing "foo" but
+ instead errors.
+
+ (reported on sbcl-help by "tichy")
+
+396: block-compilation bug
+ (let ((x 1))
+ (dotimes (y 10)
+ (let ((y y))
+ (when (funcall (eval #'(lambda (x) (eql x 2))) y)
+ (defun foo (z)
+ (incf x (incf y z))))))
+ (defun bar (z)
+ (foo z)
+ (values x)))
+ (bar 1) => 11, should be 4.
+
+397: SLEEP accuracy
+ The more interrupts arrive the less accurate SLEEP's timing gets.
+ (time (sb-thread:terminate-thread
+ (prog1 (sb-thread:make-thread (lambda ()
+ (loop
+ (princ #\!)
+ (force-output)
+ (sb-ext:gc))))
+ (sleep 1))))
+
+398: GC-unsafe SB-ALIEN string deporting
+ Translating a Lisp string to an alien string by taking a SAP to it
+ as done by the :DEPORT-GEN methods for C-STRING and UTF8-STRING
+ is not safe, since the Lisp string can move. For example the
+ following code will fail quickly on both cheneygc and pre-0.9.8.19
+ GENCGC:
+
+ (setf (bytes-consed-between-gcs) 4096)
+ (define-alien-routine "strcmp" int (s1 c-string) (s2 c-string))
+
+ (loop
+ (let ((string "hello, world"))
+ (assert (zerop (strcmp string string)))))
+
+ (This will appear to work on post-0.9.8.19 GENCGC, since
+ the GC no longer zeroes memory immediately after releasing
+ it after a minor GC. Either enabling the READ_PROTECT_FREE_PAGES
+ #define in gencgc.c or modifying the example so that a major
+ GC will occasionally be triggered would unmask the bug.)
+
+ On cheneygc the only solution would seem to be allocating some alien
+ memory, copying the data over, and arranging that it's freed once we
+ return. For GENCGC we could instead try to arrange that the string
+ from which the SAP is taken is always pinned.
+
+ For some more details see comments for (define-alien-type-method
+ (c-string :deport-gen) ...) in host-c-call.lisp.
+
+402: "DECLAIM DECLARATION does not inform the PCL code-walker"
+ reported by Vincent Arkesteijn:
+
+ (declaim (declaration foo))
+ (defgeneric bar (x))
+ (defmethod bar (x)
+ (declare (foo x))
+ x)
+
+ ==> WARNING: The declaration FOO is not understood by
+ SB-PCL::SPLIT-DECLARATIONS.
+ Please put FOO on one of the lists SB-PCL::*NON-VAR-DECLARATIONS*,
+ SB-PCL::*VAR-DECLARATIONS-WITH-ARG*, or
+ SB-PCL::*VAR-DECLARATIONS-WITHOUT-ARG*.
+ (Assuming it is a variable declaration without argument).
+
+403: FORMAT/PPRINT-LOGICAL-BLOCK of CONDITIONs ignoring *PRINT-CIRCLE*
+ In sbcl-0.9.13.34,
+ (defparameter *c*
+ (make-condition 'simple-error
+ :format-control "ow... ~S"
+ :format-arguments '(#1=(#1#))))
+ (setf *print-circle* t *print-level* 4)
+ (format nil "~@<~A~:@>" *c*)
+ gives
+ "ow... (((#)))"
+ where I (WHN) believe the correct result is "ow... #1=(#1#)",
+ like the result from (PRINC-TO-STRING *C*). The question of
+ what the correct result is is complicated by the hairy text in
+ the Hyperspec "22.3.5.2 Tilde Less-Than-Sign: Logical Block",
+ Other than the difference in its argument, ~@<...~:> is
+ exactly the same as ~<...~:> except that circularity detection
+ is not applied if ~@<...~:> is encountered at top level in a
+ format string.
+ But because the odd behavior happens even without the at-sign,
+ (format nil "~<~A~:@>" (list *c*)) ; => "ow... (((#)))"
+ and because something seemingly similar can happen even in
+ PPRINT-LOGICAL-BLOCK invoked directly without FORMAT,
+ (pprint-logical-block (*standard-output* '(some nonempty list))
+ (format *standard-output* "~A" '#1=(#1#)))
+ (which prints "(((#)))" to *STANDARD-OUTPUT*), I don't think
+ that the 22.3.5.2 trickiness is fundamental to the problem.
+
+ My guess is that the problem is related to the logic around the MODE
+ argument to CHECK-FOR-CIRCULARITY, but I haven't reverse-engineered
+ enough of the intended meaning of the different MODE values to be
+ confident of this.
+
+404: nonstandard DWIMness in LOOP with unportably-ordered clauses
+ In sbcl-0.9.13, the code
+ (loop with stack = (make-array 2 :fill-pointer 2 :initial-element t)
+ for length = (length stack)
+ while (plusp length)
+ for element = (vector-pop stack)
+ collect element)
+ compiles without error or warning and returns (T T). Unfortunately,
+ it is inconsistent with the ANSI definition of the LOOP macro,
+ because it mixes up VARIABLE-CLAUSEs with MAIN-CLAUSEs. Furthermore,
+ SBCL's interpretation of the intended meaning is only one possible,
+ unportable interpretation of the noncompliant code; in CLISP 2.33.2,
+ the code compiles with a warning
+ LOOP: FOR clauses should occur before the loop's main body
+ and then fails at runtime with
+ VECTOR-POP: #() has length zero
+ perhaps because CLISP has shuffled the clauses into an
+ ANSI-compliant order before proceeding.
projects / sbcl.git / blobdiff