+172:
+ sbcl's treatment of at least macro lambda lists is too permissive;
+ e.g., in sbcl-0.7.3.7:
+ (defmacro foo (&rest rest bar) `(,bar ,rest))
+ (macroexpand '(foo quux zot)) -> (QUUX (QUUX ZOT))
+ whereas section 3.4.4 of the CLHS doesn't allow required parameters
+ to come after the rest argument.
+
+173:
+ The compiler sometimes tries to constant-fold expressions before
+ it checks to see whether they can be reached. This can lead to
+ bogus warnings about errors in the constant folding, e.g. in code
+ like
+ (WHEN X
+ (WRITE-STRING (> X 0) "+" "0"))
+ compiled in a context where the compiler can prove that X is NIL,
+ and the compiler complains that (> X 0) causes a type error because
+ NIL isn't a valid argument to #'>. Until sbcl-0.7.4.10 or so this
+ caused a full WARNING, which made the bug really annoying because then
+ COMPILE and COMPILE-FILE returned FAILURE-P=T for perfectly legal
+ code. Since then the warning has been downgraded to STYLE-WARNING,
+ so it's still a bug but at least it's a little less annoying.
+
+174:
+ The error message from attempting to use a #\Return format
+ directive:
+ (format nil "~^M") ; replace "^M" with a literal #\Return
+ debugger invoked on condition of type SB-FORMAT::FORMAT-ERROR:
+ error in format: unknown format directive
+ ~
+ ^
+ is not terribly helpful; this is more noticeable than parallel cases
+ with e.g. #\Backspace because of the differing newline conventions
+ on various operating systems. (reported by Harald Hanche-Olsen on
+ cmucl-help 2002-05-31)
+
+176:
+ reported by Alexey Dejneka 08 Jun 2002 in sbcl-devel:
+ Playing with McCLIM, I've received an error "Unbound variable WRAPPER
+ in SB-PCL::CHECK-WRAPPER-VALIDITY".
+ (defun check-wrapper-validity (instance)
+ (let* ((owrapper (wrapper-of instance)))
+ (if (not (invalid-wrapper-p owrapper))
+ owrapper
+ (let* ((state (wrapper-state wrapper)) ; !!!
+ ...
+ I've tried to replace it with OWRAPPER, but now OBSOLETE-INSTANCE-TRAP
+ breaks with "NIL is not of type SB-KERNEL:LAYOUT".
+ SBCL 0.7.4.13.
+ partial fix: The undefined variable WRAPPER resulted from an error
+ in recent refactoring, as can be seen by comparing to the code in e.g.
+ sbcl-0.7.2. Replacing WRAPPER with OWRAPPER (done by WHN in sbcl-0.7.4.22)
+ should bring the code back to its behavior as of sbcl-0.7.2, but
+ that still leaves the OBSOLETE-INSTANCE-TRAP bug. An example of
+ input which triggers that bug is
+ (dotimes (i 20)
+ (let ((lastname (intern (format nil "C~D" (1- i))))
+ (name (intern (format nil "C~D" i))))
+ (eval `(defclass ,name
+ (,@(if (= i 0) nil (list lastname)))
+ ()))
+ (eval `(defmethod initialize-instance :after ((x ,name) &rest any)
+ (declare (ignore any))))))
+ (defclass b () ())
+ (defclass c0 (b) ())
+ (make-instance 'c19)
+
+ See also bug #140.
+
+178: "AVER failure compiling confused THEs in FUNCALL"
+ In sbcl-0.7.4.24, compiling
+ (defun bug178 (x)
+ (funcall (the function (the standard-object x))))
+ gives
+ failed AVER:
+ "(AND (EQ (IR2-CONTINUATION-PRIMITIVE-TYPE 2CONT) FUNCTION-PTYPE) (EQ CHECK T))"
+ This variant compiles OK, though:
+ (defun bug178alternative (x)
+ (funcall (the nil x)))
+
+181: "bad type specifier drops compiler into debugger"
+ Compiling
+ (in-package :cl-user)
+ (defun bar (x)
+ (declare (type 0 x))
+ (cons x x))
+ signals
+ bad thing to be a type specifier: 0
+ which seems fine, but also enters the debugger (instead of having
+ the compiler handle the error, convert it into a COMPILER-ERROR, and
+ continue compiling) which seems wrong.
+
+182: "SPARC/Linux floating point"
+ Evaluating (/ 1.0 0.0) at the prompt causes a Bus error and complete
+ death of the environment. Other floating point operations sometimes
+ return infinities when they should raise traps (e.g. the test case
+ for bug #146, (expt 2.0 12777)).
+
+183: "IEEE floating point issues"
+ Even where floating point handling is being dealt with relatively
+ well (as of sbcl-0.7.5, on sparc/sunos and alpha; see bug #146), the
+ accrued-exceptions and current-exceptions part of the fp control
+ word don't seem to bear much relation to reality. E.g. on
+ SPARC/SunOS:
+ * (/ 1.0 0.0)
+
+ debugger invoked on condition of type DIVISION-BY-ZERO:
+ arithmetic error DIVISION-BY-ZERO signalled
+ 0] (sb-vm::get-floating-point-modes)
+
+ (:TRAPS (:OVERFLOW :INVALID :DIVIDE-BY-ZERO)
+ :ROUNDING-MODE :NEAREST
+ :CURRENT-EXCEPTIONS NIL
+ :ACCRUED-EXCEPTIONS (:INEXACT)
+ :FAST-MODE NIL)
+ 0] abort
+ * (sb-vm::get-floating-point-modes)
+ (:TRAPS (:OVERFLOW :INVALID :DIVIDE-BY-ZERO)
+ :ROUNDING-MODE :NEAREST
+ :CURRENT-EXCEPTIONS (:INEXACT)
+ :ACCRUED-EXCEPTIONS (:INEXACT)
+ :FAST-MODE NIL)
+
+184: "division by zero becomes frozen into RATIO"
+ (reported by Wolfhard Buss on cmucl-imp 18 Jun 2002, fails on
+ sbcl-0.7.4.39 too)
+ * (/ 1 (/ 3 2) 0)
+ 1/0
+
+185: "top-level forms at the REPL"
+ * (locally (defstruct foo (a 0 :type fixnum)))
+ gives an error:
+ ; caught ERROR:
+ ; (in macroexpansion of (SB-KERNEL::%DELAYED-GET-COMPILER-LAYOUT BAR))
+ however, compiling and loading the same expression in a file works
+ as expected.
+
+187: "type inference confusion around DEFTRANSFORM time"
+ (reported even more verbosely on sbcl-devel 2002-06-28 as "strange
+ bug in DEFTRANSFORM")
+ After the file below is compiled and loaded in sbcl-0.7.5, executing
+ (TCX (MAKE-ARRAY 4 :FILL-POINTER 2) 0)
+ at the REPL returns an adjustable vector, which is wrong. Presumably
+ somehow the DERIVE-TYPE information for the output values of %WAD is
+ being mispropagated as a type constraint on the input values of %WAD,
+ and so causing the type test to be optimized away. It's unclear how
+ hand-expanding the DEFTRANSFORM would change this, but it suggests
+ the DEFTRANSFORM machinery (or at least the way DEFTRANSFORMs are
+ invoked at a particular phase) is involved.
+ (cl:in-package :sb-c)
+ (eval-when (:compile-toplevel)
+ ;;; standin for %DATA-VECTOR-AND-INDEX
+ (defknown %dvai (array index)
+ (values t t)
+ (foldable flushable))
+ (deftransform %dvai ((array index)
+ (vector t)
+ *
+ :important t)
+ (let* ((atype (continuation-type array))
+ (eltype (array-type-specialized-element-type atype)))
+ (when (eq eltype *wild-type*)
+ (give-up-ir1-transform
+ "specialized array element type not known at compile-time"))
+ (when (not (array-type-complexp atype))
+ (give-up-ir1-transform "SIMPLE array!"))
+ `(if (array-header-p array)
+ (%wad array index nil)
+ (values array index))))
+ ;;; standin for %WITH-ARRAY-DATA
+ (defknown %wad (array index (or index null))
+ (values (simple-array * (*)) index index index)
+ (foldable flushable))
+ ;;; (Commenting out this optimizer causes the bug to go away.)
+ (defoptimizer (%wad derive-type) ((array start end))
+ (let ((atype (continuation-type array)))
+ (when (array-type-p atype)
+ (values-specifier-type
+ `(values (simple-array ,(type-specifier
+ (array-type-specialized-element-type atype))
+ (*))
+ index index index)))))
+ ) ; EVAL-WHEN
+ (defun %wad (array start end)
+ (format t "~&in %WAD~%")
+ (%with-array-data array start end))
+ (cl:in-package :cl-user)
+ (defun tcx (v i)
+ (declare (type (vector t) v))
+ (declare (notinline sb-kernel::%with-array-data))
+ ;; (Hand-expending DEFTRANSFORM %DVAI here also causes the bug to
+ ;; go away.)
+ (sb-c::%dvai v i))
+
+188: "compiler performance fiasco involving type inference and UNION-TYPE"
+ In sbcl-0.7.5.11 on a 700 MHz Pentium III,
+ (time (compile
+ nil
+ '(lambda ()
+ (declare (optimize (safety 3)))
+ (declare (optimize (compilation-speed 2)))
+ (declare (optimize (speed 1) (debug 1) (space 1)))
+ (let ((fn "if-this-file-exists-the-universe-is-strange"))
+ (load fn :if-does-not-exist nil)
+ (load (concatenate 'string fn ".lisp") :if-does-not-exist nil)
+ (load (concatenate 'string fn ".fasl") :if-does-not-exist nil)
+ (load (concatenate 'string fn ".misc-garbage")
+ :if-does-not-exist nil)))))
+ reports
+ 134.552 seconds of real time
+ 133.35156 seconds of user run time
+ 0.03125 seconds of system run time
+ [Run times include 2.787 seconds GC run time.]
+ 0 page faults and
+ 246883368 bytes consed.
+ BACKTRACE from Ctrl-C in the compilation shows that the compiler is
+ thinking about type relationships involving types like
+ #<UNION-TYPE
+ (OR (INTEGER 576 576)
+ (INTEGER 1192 1192)
+ (INTEGER 2536 2536)
+ (INTEGER 1816 1816)
+ (INTEGER 2752 2752)
+ (INTEGER 1600 1600)
+ (INTEGER 2640 2640)
+ (INTEGER 1808 1808)
+ (INTEGER 1296 1296)
+ ...)>)[:EXTERNAL]
+
+189: "ignored NOTINLINE for functions defined by FLET or LABELS"
+ According to the ANSI definition of the NOTINLINE declaration,
+ NOTINLINE specifies that it is undesirable to compile the functions
+ named by FUNCTION-NAMES in-line. A compiler is not free to ignore
+ this declaration; calls to the specified functions must be implemented
+ as out-of-line subroutine calls.
+ However, as of sbcl-0.7.5.22, Python ignores this declaration for
+ functions defined by LABELS and FLET, and merrily optimizes away the
+ LAMBDAs. (This is an annoyance not just for language lawyers, but for
+ people who want a useful BACKTRACE for functions which, for whatever
+ reason, are constrained to be implemented as LABELS or LET.)
+
projects / sbcl.git / blobdiff