+270:
+ In the following function constraint propagator optimizes nothing:
+
+ (defun foo (x)
+ (declare (integer x))
+ (declare (optimize speed))
+ (typecase x
+ (fixnum "hala")
+ (fixnum "buba")
+ (bignum "hip")
+ (t "zuz")))
+
+273:
+ Compilation of the following two forms causes "X is unbound" error:
+
+ (symbol-macrolet ((x pi))
+ (macrolet ((foo (y) (+ x y)))
+ (declaim (inline bar))
+ (defun bar (z)
+ (* z (foo 4)))))
+ (defun quux (z)
+ (bar z))
+
+ (See (COERCE (CDR X) 'FUNCTION) in IR1-CONVERT-INLINE-LAMBDA.)
+
+274:
+ CLHS says that type declaration of a symbol macro should not affect
+ its expansion, but in SBCL it does. (If you like magic and want to
+ fix it, don't forget to change all uses of MACROEXPAND to
+ MACROEXPAND*.)
+
+275:
+ The following code (taken from CLOCC) takes a lot of time to compile:
+
+ (defun foo (n)
+ (declare (type (integer 0 #.large-constant) n))
+ (expt 1/10 n))
+
+ (fixed in 0.8.2.51, but a test case would be good)
+
+276:
+ (defmethod fee ((x fixnum))
+ (setq x (/ x 2))
+ x)
+ (fee 1) => type error
+
+ (taken from CLOCC)
+
+278:
+ a.
+ (defun foo ()
+ (declare (optimize speed))
+ (loop for i of-type (integer 0) from 0 by 2 below 10
+ collect i))
+
+ uses generic arithmetic.
+
+ b. For the example above, the compiler does not issue a note.
+ (fixed in 0.8.3.6, but a test case would be good)
+
+279: type propagation error -- correctly inferred type goes astray?
+ In sbcl-0.8.3 and sbcl-0.8.1.47, the warning
+ The binding of ABS-FOO is a (VALUES (INTEGER 0 0)
+ &OPTIONAL), not a (INTEGER 1 536870911)
+ is emitted when compiling this file:
+ (declaim (ftype (function ((integer 0 #.most-positive-fixnum))
+ (integer #.most-negative-fixnum 0))
+ foo))
+ (defun foo (x)
+ (- x))
+ (defun bar (x)
+ (let* (;; Uncomment this for a type mismatch warning indicating
+ ;; that the type of (FOO X) is correctly understood.
+ #+nil (fs-foo (float-sign (foo x)))
+ ;; Uncomment this for a type mismatch warning
+ ;; indicating that the type of (ABS (FOO X)) is
+ ;; correctly understood.
+ #+nil (fs-abs-foo (float-sign (abs (foo x))))
+ ;; something wrong with this one though
+ (abs-foo (abs (foo x))))
+ (declare (type (integer 1 100) abs-foo))
+ (print abs-foo)))
+
+ (see also bug 117)
+
+280: bogus WARNING about duplicate function definition
+ In sbcl-0.8.3 and sbcl-0.8.1.47, if BS.MIN is defined inline,
+ e.g. by
+ (declaim (inline bs.min))
+ (defun bs.min (bases) nil)
+ before compiling the file below, the compiler warns
+ Duplicate definition for BS.MIN found in one static
+ unit (usually a file).
+ when compiling
+ (declaim (special *minus* *plus* *stagnant*))
+ (defun b.*.min (&optional (x () xp) (y () yp) &rest rest)
+ (bs.min avec))
+ (define-compiler-macro b.*.min (&rest rest)
+ `(bs.min ,@rest))
+ (defun afish-d-rbd (pd)
+ (if *stagnant*
+ (b.*.min (foo-d-rbd *stagnant*))
+ (multiple-value-bind (reduce-fn initial-value)
+ (etypecase pd
+ (list (values #'bs.min 0))
+ (vector (values #'bs.min *plus*)))
+ (let ((cv-ks (cv (kpd.ks pd))))
+ (funcall reduce-fn d-rbds)))))
+ (defun bfish-d-rbd (pd)
+ (if *stagnant*
+ (b.*.min (foo-d-rbd *stagnant*))
+ (multiple-value-bind (reduce-fn initial-value)
+ (etypecase pd
+ (list (values #'bs.min *minus*))
+ (vector (values #'bs.min 0)))
+ (let ((cv-ks (cv (kpd.ks pd))))
+ (funcall reduce-fn d-rbds)))))
+
+281: COMPUTE-EFFECTIVE-METHOD error signalling.
+ (slightly obscured by a non-0 default value for
+ SB-PCL::*MAX-EMF-PRECOMPUTE-METHODS*)
+ It would be natural for COMPUTE-EFFECTIVE-METHOD to signal errors
+ when it finds a method with invalid qualifiers. However, it
+ shouldn't signal errors when any such methods are not applicable to
+ the particular call being evaluated, and certainly it shouldn't when
+ simply precomputing effective methods that may never be called.
+ (setf sb-pcl::*max-emf-precompute-methods* 0)
+ (defgeneric foo (x)
+ (:method-combination +)
+ (:method ((x symbol)) 1)
+ (:method + ((x number)) x))
+ (foo 1) -> ERROR, but should simply return 1
+
+ The issue seems to be that construction of a discriminating function
+ calls COMPUTE-EFFECTIVE-METHOD with methods that are not all applicable.
+
+282: "type checking in full calls"
+ In current (0.8.3.6) implementation a CAST in a full call argument
+ is not checked; but the continuation between the CAST and the
+ combination has the "checked" type and CAST performs unsafe
+ coercion; this may lead to errors: if FOO is declared to take a
+ FIXNUM, this code will produce garbage on a machine with 30-bit
+ fixnums:
+
+ (foo (aref (the (array (unsigned-byte 32)) x)))
+
+283: Thread safety: libc functions
+ There are places that we call unsafe-for-threading libc functions
+ that we should find alternatives for, or put locks around. Known or
+ strongly suspected problems, as of 0.8.3.10: please update this
+ bug instead of creating new ones
+
+ localtime() - called for timezone calculations in code/time.lisp
+
+284: Thread safety: special variables
+ There are lots of special variables in SBCL, and I feel sure that at
+ least some of them are indicative of potentially thread-unsafe
+ parts of the system. See doc/internals/notes/threading-specials
+
+285: PPC randomness
+ In SBCL 0.8.3.1x on a powerpc running Linux (dunno if Darwin is
+ similarly affected):
+ * (dotimes (i 100) (random 1663553320000000))
+
+ NIL
+ * (dotimes (i 100) (random 1663553340000000))
+
+ NIL
+ * (dotimes (i 100) (random 1663553350000000))
+
+ debugger invoked on condition of type TYPE-ERROR:
+ The value -30653269094906
+ is not of type
+ (OR (SINGLE-FLOAT 0.0) (DOUBLE-FLOAT 0.0d0) (RATIONAL 0)).
+
+ and, weirdly, the frame is:
+ ("hairy arg processor for top level local call RANDOM"
+ 1663553347392000
+ #S(RANDOM-STATE
+ :STATE #(0 2567483615 188 1503590015 2333049409 322761517 ...)))
+
+ (the type error doesn't seem to be terribly deterministic in when it
+ occurs. Bigger numbers seem better able to trigger the error)
+
+286: "recursive known functions"
+ Self-call recognition conflicts with known function
+ recognition. Currently cross compiler and target COMPILE do not
+ recognize recursion, and in target compiler it can be disabled. We
+ can always disable it for known functions with RECURSIVE attribute,
+ but there remains a possibility of a function with a
+ (tail)-recursive simplification pass and transforms/VOPs for base
+ cases.
+
+287: PPC/Linux miscompilation or corruption in first GC
+ When the runtime is compiled with -O3 on certain PPC/Linux machines, a
+ segmentation fault is reported at the point of first triggered GC,
+ during the compilation of DEFSTRUCT WRAPPER. As a temporary workaround,
+ the runtime is no longer compiled with -O3 on PPC/Linux, but it is likely
+ that this merely obscures, not solves, the underlying problem; as and when
+ underlying problems are fixed, it would be worth trying again to provoke
+ this problem.
projects / sbcl.git / blobdiff