0.8.2.55:

[sbcl.git] / BUGS

diff --git a/BUGS b/BUGS
index 4582384..84357b1 100644 (file)
--- a/BUGS
+++ b/BUGS
@@ -170,12 +170,6 @@ WORKAROUND:
 45:
   a slew of floating-point-related errors reported by Peter Van Eynde
   on July 25, 2000:
 45:
   a slew of floating-point-related errors reported by Peter Van Eynde
   on July 25, 2000:

-       b: SBCL's value for LEAST-POSITIVE-SHORT-FLOAT on the x86 is 
-          bogus, and should probably be 1.4012985e-45. In SBCL,
-          (/ LEAST-POSITIVE-SHORT-FLOAT 2) returns a number smaller
-          than LEAST-POSITIVE-SHORT-FLOAT. Similar problems 
-          exist for LEAST-NEGATIVE-SHORT-FLOAT, LEAST-POSITIVE-LONG-FLOAT,
-          and LEAST-NEGATIVE-LONG-FLOAT.

        c: Many expressions generate floating infinity on x86/Linux:
                (/ 1 0.0)
                (/ 1 0.0d0)
        c: Many expressions generate floating infinity on x86/Linux:
                (/ 1 0.0)
                (/ 1 0.0d0)

@@ -496,6 +490,7 @@ WORKAROUND:
   it took more than two minutes (but less than five) for me.
 
 145:
   it took more than two minutes (but less than five) for me.
 
 145:

+  a.

   ANSI allows types `(COMPLEX ,FOO) to use very hairy values for
   FOO, e.g. (COMPLEX (AND REAL (SATISFIES ODDP))). The old CMU CL
   COMPLEX implementation didn't deal with this, and hasn't been
   ANSI allows types `(COMPLEX ,FOO) to use very hairy values for
   FOO, e.g. (COMPLEX (AND REAL (SATISFIES ODDP))). The old CMU CL
   COMPLEX implementation didn't deal with this, and hasn't been

@@ -503,6 +498,18 @@ WORKAROUND:
   conformance problem, since seems hard to construct useful code
   where it matters.)
 
   conformance problem, since seems hard to construct useful code
   where it matters.)
 

+  b.
+  * (defun foo (x)
+      (declare (type (double-float -0d0) x))
+      (declare (optimize speed))
+      (+ x (sqrt (log (random 1d0)))))
+  debugger invoked on condition of type SIMPLE-ERROR:
+    bad thing to be a type specifier: ((COMPLEX
+                                        (DOUBLE-FLOAT 0.0d0
+                                                      #.SB-EXT:DOUBLE-FLOAT-POSITIVE-INFINITY))
+                                       #C(0.0d0 #.SB-EXT:DOUBLE-FLOAT-POSITIVE-INFINITY)
+                                       #C(0.0d0 #.SB-EXT:DOUBLE-FLOAT-POSITIVE-INFINITY))
+

 146:
   Floating point errors are reported poorly. E.g. on x86 OpenBSD
   with sbcl-0.7.1, 
 146:
   Floating point errors are reported poorly. E.g. on x86 OpenBSD
   with sbcl-0.7.1, 

@@ -1057,14 +1064,48 @@ WORKAROUND:
         (bignum "hip")
         (t "zuz")))
 
         (bignum "hip")
         (t "zuz")))
 

-271:
-  Cross-compiler cannot perform constant folding of some internal
-  functions, such as %NEGATE.
-

 272:
   All forms of GC hooks (including notifiers and finalisers) are currently
   (since 0.8.0) broken for gencgc (i.e. x86) users 
 
 272:
   All forms of GC hooks (including notifiers and finalisers) are currently
   (since 0.8.0) broken for gencgc (i.e. x86) users 
 

+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.
+
+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)
+
+277:
+  IGNORE/IGNORABLE declarations should be acceptable for symbol
+  macros.
+

 
 DEFUNCT CATEGORIES OF BUGS
   IR1-#:
 
 DEFUNCT CATEGORIES OF BUGS
   IR1-#: