+ (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:
+ b. The same as in a., but using MULTIPLE-VALUE-SETQ instead of SETQ.
+ c. (defvar *faa*)
+ (defmethod faa ((*faa* double-float))
+ (set '*faa* (when (< *faa* 0) (- *faa*)))
+ (1+ *faa*))
+ (faa 1d0) => type error
+
+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)
+
+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 1.0.3.13: please update this
+ bug instead of creating new ones
+
+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
+
+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.
+
+288: fundamental cross-compilation issues (from old UGLINESS file)
+ Using host floating point numbers to represent target floating point
+ numbers, or host characters to represent target characters, is
+ theoretically shaky. (The characters are OK as long as the characters
+ are in the ANSI-guaranteed character set, though, so they aren't a
+ real problem as long as the sources don't need anything but that;
+ the floats are a real problem.)
+
+289: "type checking and source-transforms"
+ a.
+ (block nil (let () (funcall #'+ (eval 'nil) (eval '1) (return :good))))
+ signals type error.
+
+ Our policy is to check argument types at the moment of a call. It
+ disagrees with ANSI, which says that type assertions are put
+ immediately onto argument expressions, but is easier to implement in
+ IR1 and is more compatible to type inference, inline expansion,
+ etc. IR1-transforms automatically keep this policy, but source
+ transforms for associative functions (such as +), being applied
+ during IR1-convertion, do not. It may be tolerable for direct calls
+ (+ x y z), but for (FUNCALL #'+ x y z) it is non-conformant.
+
+ b. Another aspect of this problem is efficiency. [x y + z +]
+ requires less registers than [x y z + +]. This transformation is
+ currently performed with source transforms, but it would be good to
+ also perform it in IR1 optimization phase.
+
+290: Alpha floating point and denormalized traps
+ In SBCL 0.8.3.6x on the alpha, we work around what appears to be a
+ hardware or kernel deficiency: the status of the enable/disable
+ denormalized-float traps bit seems to be ambiguous; by the time we
+ get to os_restore_fp_control after a trap, denormalized traps seem
+ to be enabled. Since we don't want a trap every time someone uses a
+ denormalized float, in general, we mask out that bit when we restore
+ the control word; however, this clobbers any change the user might
+ have made.
+
+297:
+ LOOP with non-constant arithmetic step clauses suffers from overzealous
+ type constraint: code of the form
+ (loop for d of-type double-float from 0d0 to 10d0 by x collect d)
+ compiles to a type restriction on X of (AND DOUBLE-FLOAT (REAL
+ (0))). However, an integral value of X should be legal, because
+ successive adds of integers to double-floats produces double-floats,
+ so none of the type restrictions in the code is violated.
+
+300: (reported by Peter Graves) Function PEEK-CHAR checks PEEK-TYPE
+ argument type only after having read a character. This is caused
+ with EXPLICIT-CHECK attribute in DEFKNOWN. The similar problem
+ exists with =, /=, <, >, <=, >=. They were fixed, but it is probably
+ less error prone to have EXPLICIT-CHECK be a local declaration,
+ being put into the definition, instead of an attribute being kept in
+ a separate file; maybe also put it into SB-EXT?
+
+301: ARRAY-SIMPLE-=-TYPE-METHOD breaks on corner cases which can arise
+ in NOTE-ASSUMED-TYPES
+ In sbcl-0.8.7.32, compiling the file
+ (defun foo (x y)
+ (declare (type integer x))
+ (declare (type (vector (or hash-table bit)) y))
+ (bletch 2 y))
+ (defun bar (x y)
+ (declare (type integer x))
+ (declare (type (simple-array base (2)) y))
+ (bletch 1 y))
+ gives the error
+ failed AVER: "(NOT (AND (NOT EQUALP) CERTAINP))"
+
+303: "nonlinear LVARs" (aka MISC.293)
+ (defun buu (x)
+ (multiple-value-call #'list
+ (block foo
+ (multiple-value-prog1
+ (eval '(values :a :b :c))
+ (catch 'bar
+ (if (> x 0)
+ (return-from foo
+ (eval `(if (> ,x 1)
+ 1
+ (throw 'bar (values 3 4)))))))))))
+
+ (BUU 1) returns garbage.
+
+ The problem is that both EVALs sequentially write to the same LVAR.
+
+306: "Imprecise unions of array types"
+
+ a. fixed in SBCL 0.9.15.48
+
+ b.(subtypep
+ 'array
+ `(or
+ ,@(loop for x across sb-vm:*specialized-array-element-type-properties*
+ collect `(array ,(sb-vm:saetp-specifier x)))))
+ => NIL, T (when it should be T, T)
+
+309: "Dubious values for implementation limits"
+ (reported by Bruno Haible sbcl-devel "Incorrect value of
+ multiple-values-limit" 2004-04-19)
+ (values-list (make-list 1000000)), on x86/linux, signals a stack
+ exhaustion condition, despite MULTIPLE-VALUES-LIMIT being
+ significantly larger than 1000000. There are probably similar
+ dubious values for CALL-ARGUMENTS-LIMIT (see cmucl-help/cmucl-imp
+ around the same time regarding a call to LIST on sparc with 1000
+ arguments) and other implementation limit constants.
+
+314: "LOOP :INITIALLY clauses and scope of initializers"
+ reported by Bruno Haible sbcl-devel "various SBCL bugs" from CLISP
+ test suite, originally by Thomas F. Burdick.
+ ;; <http://www.lisp.org/HyperSpec/Body/sec_6-1-7-2.html>
+ ;; According to the HyperSpec 6.1.2.1.4, in for-as-equals-then, var is
+ ;; initialized to the result of evaluating form1. 6.1.7.2 says that
+ ;; initially clauses are evaluated in the loop prologue, which precedes all
+ ;; loop code except for the initial settings provided by with, for, or as.
+ (loop :for x = 0 :then (1+ x)
+ :for y = (1+ x) :then (ash y 1)
+ :for z :across #(1 3 9 27 81 243)
+ :for w = (+ x y z)
+ :initially (assert (zerop x)) :initially (assert (= 2 w))
+ :until (>= w 100) :collect w)
+ Expected: (2 6 15 38)
+ Got: ERROR
+
+318: "stack overflow in compiler warning with redefined class"
+ reported by Bruno Haible sbcl-devel "various SBCL bugs" from CLISP
+ test suite.
+ (defstruct foo a)
+ (setf (find-class 'foo) nil)
+ (defstruct foo slot-1)
+ This used to give a stack overflow from within the printer, which has
+ been fixed as of 0.8.16.11. Current result:
+ ; caught ERROR:
+ ; can't compile TYPEP of anonymous or undefined class:
+ ; #<SB-KERNEL:STRUCTURE-CLASSOID FOO>
+ ...
+ debugger invoked on a TYPE-ERROR in thread 19973:
+ The value NIL is not of type FUNCTION.
+
+ CSR notes: it's not really clear what it should give: is (SETF FIND-CLASS)
+ meant to be enough to delete structure classes from the system?
+
+319: "backquote with comma inside array"
+ reported by Bruno Haible sbcl-devel "various SBCL bugs" from CLISP
+ test suite.
+ (read-from-string "`#1A(1 2 ,(+ 2 2) 4)")
+ gives
+ #(1 2 ((SB-IMPL::|,|) + 2 2) 4)
+ which probably isn't intentional.
+
+324: "STREAMs and :ELEMENT-TYPE with large bytesize"
+ In theory, (open foo :element-type '(unsigned-byte <x>)) should work
+ for all positive integral <x>. At present, it only works for <x> up
+ to about 1024 (and similarly for signed-byte), so
+ (open "/dev/zero" :element-type '(unsigned-byte 1025))
+ gives an error in sbcl-0.8.10.
+
+325: "CLOSE :ABORT T on supeseding streams"
+ Closing a stream opened with :IF-EXISTS :SUPERSEDE with :ABORT T leaves no
+ file on disk, even if one existed before opening.
+
+ The illegality of this is not crystal clear, as the ANSI dictionary
+ entry for CLOSE says that when :ABORT is T superseded files are not
+ superseded (ie. the original should be restored), whereas the OPEN
+ entry says about :IF-EXISTS :SUPERSEDE "If possible, the
+ implementation should not destroy the old file until the new stream
+ is closed." -- implying that even though undesirable, early deletion
+ is legal. Restoring the original would none the less be the polite
+ thing to do.
+
+326: "*PRINT-CIRCLE* crosstalk between streams"
+ In sbcl-0.8.10.48 it's possible for *PRINT-CIRCLE* references to be
+ mixed between streams when output operations are intermingled closely
+ enough (as by doing output on S2 from within (PRINT-OBJECT X S1) in the
+ test case below), so that e.g. the references #2# appears on a stream
+ with no preceding #2= on that stream to define it (because the #2= was
+ sent to another stream).
+ (cl:in-package :cl-user)
+ (defstruct foo index)
+ (defparameter *foo* (make-foo :index 4))
+ (defstruct bar)
+ (defparameter *bar* (make-bar))
+ (defparameter *tangle* (list *foo* *bar* *foo*))
+ (defmethod print-object ((foo foo) stream)
+ (let ((index (foo-index foo)))
+ (format *trace-output*
+ "~&-$- emitting FOO ~D, ambient *BAR*=~S~%"
+ index *bar*)
+ (format stream "[FOO ~D]" index))
+ foo)
+ (let ((tsos (make-string-output-stream))
+ (ssos (make-string-output-stream)))
+ (let ((*print-circle* t)
+ (*trace-output* tsos)
+ (*standard-output* ssos))
+ (prin1 *tangle* *standard-output*))
+ (let ((string (get-output-stream-string ssos)))
+ (unless (string= string "(#1=[FOO 4] #S(BAR) #1#)")
+ ;; In sbcl-0.8.10.48 STRING was "(#1=[FOO 4] #2# #1#)".:-(
+ (error "oops: ~S" string)))))
+ It might be straightforward to fix this by turning the
+ *CIRCULARITY-HASH-TABLE* and *CIRCULARITY-COUNTER* variables into
+ per-stream slots, but (1) it would probably be sort of messy faking
+ up the special variable binding semantics using UNWIND-PROTECT and
+ (2) it might be sort of a pain to test that no other bugs had been
+ introduced.
+
+328: "Profiling generic functions", transplanted from #241
+ (from tonyms on #lisp IRC 2003-02-25)
+ In sbcl-0.7.12.55, typing
+ (defclass foo () ((bar :accessor foo-bar)))
+ (profile foo-bar)
+ (unintern 'foo-bar)
+ (defclass foo () ((bar :accessor foo-bar)))
+ gives the error message
+ "#:FOO-BAR already names an ordinary function or a macro."
+
+ Problem: when a generic function is profiled, it appears as an ordinary
+ function to PCL. (Remembering the uninterned accessor is OK, as the
+ redefinition must be able to remove old accessors from their generic
+ functions.)
+
+329: "Sequential class redefinition"
+ reported by Bruno Haible:
+ (defclass reactor () ((max-temp :initform 10000000)))
+ (defvar *r1* (make-instance 'reactor))
+ (defvar *r2* (make-instance 'reactor))
+ (slot-value *r1* 'max-temp)
+ (slot-value *r2* 'max-temp)
+ (defclass reactor () ((uptime :initform 0)))
+ (slot-value *r1* 'uptime)
+ (defclass reactor () ((uptime :initform 0) (max-temp :initform 10000)))
+ (slot-value *r1* 'max-temp) ; => 10000
+ (slot-value *r2* 'max-temp) ; => 10000000 oops...
+
+ Possible solution:
+ The method effective when the wrapper is obsoleted can be saved
+ in the wrapper, and then to update the instance just run through
+ all the old wrappers in order from oldest to newest.
+
+332: "fasl stack inconsistency in structure redefinition"
+ (reported by Tim Daly Jr sbcl-devel 2004-05-06)
+ Even though structure redefinition is undefined by the standard, the
+ following behaviour is suboptimal: running
+ (defun stimulate-sbcl ()
+ (let ((filename (format nil "/tmp/~A.lisp" (gensym))))
+ ;;create a file which redefines a structure incompatibly
+ (with-open-file (f filename :direction :output :if-exists :supersede)
+ (print '(defstruct astruct foo) f)
+ (print '(defstruct astruct foo bar) f))
+ ;;compile and load the file, then invoke the continue restart on
+ ;;the structure redefinition error
+ (handler-bind ((error (lambda (c) (continue c))))
+ (load (compile-file filename)))))
+ (stimulate-sbcl)
+ and choosing the CONTINUE restart yields the message
+ debugger invoked on a SB-INT:BUG in thread 27726:
+ fasl stack not empty when it should be
+
+336: "slot-definitions must retain the generic functions of accessors"
+ reported by Tony Martinez:
+ (defclass foo () ((bar :reader foo-bar)))
+ (defun foo-bar (x) x)
+ (defclass foo () ((bar :reader get-bar))) ; => error, should work
+
+ Note: just punting the accessor removal if the fdefinition
+ is not a generic function is not enough:
+
+ (defclass foo () ((bar :reader foo-bar)))
+ (defvar *reader* #'foo-bar)
+ (defun foo-bar (x) x)
+ (defclass foo () ((bar :initform 'ok :reader get-bar)))
+ (funcall *reader* (make-instance 'foo)) ; should be an error, since
+ ; the method must be removed
+ ; by the class redefinition
+
+ Fixing this should also fix a subset of #328 -- update the
+ description with a new test-case then.
+
+339: "DEFINE-METHOD-COMBINATION bugs"
+ (reported by Bruno Haible via the clisp test suite)
+
+ a. Syntax checking laxity (should produce errors):
+ i. (define-method-combination foo :documentation :operator)
+ ii. (define-method-combination foo :documentation nil)
+ iii. (define-method-combination foo nil)
+ iv. (define-method-combination foo nil nil
+ (:arguments order &aux &key))
+ v. (define-method-combination foo nil nil (:arguments &whole))
+ vi. (define-method-combination foo nil nil (:generic-function))
+ vii. (define-method-combination foo nil nil (:generic-function bar baz))
+ viii. (define-method-combination foo nil nil (:generic-function (bar)))
+ ix. (define-method-combination foo nil ((3)))
+ x. (define-method-combination foo nil ((a)))
+
+ b. define-method-combination arguments lambda list badness
+ i. &aux args are currently unsupported;
+ ii. default values of &optional and &key arguments are ignored;
+ iii. supplied-p variables for &optional and &key arguments are not
+ bound.
+
+ c. (fixed in sbcl-0.9.15.15)
+
+344: more (?) ROOM T problems (possibly part of bug 108)
+ In sbcl-0.8.12.51, and off and on leading up to it, the
+ SB!VM:MEMORY-USAGE operations in ROOM T caused
+ unhandled condition (of type SB-INT:BUG):
+ failed AVER: "(SAP= CURRENT END)"
+ Several clever people have taken a shot at this without fixing
+ it; this time around (before sbcl-0.8.13 release) I (WHN) just
+ commented out the SB!VM:MEMORY-USAGE calls until someone figures
+ out how to make them work reliably with the rest of the GC.
+
+ (Note: there's at least one dubious thing in room.lisp: see the
+ comment in VALID-OBJ)
+
+346: alpha backtrace
+ In sbcl-0.8.13, all backtraces from errors caused by internal errors
+ on the alpha seem to have a "bogus stack frame".
+
+349: PPRINT-INDENT rounding implementation decisions
+ At present, pprint-indent (and indeed the whole pretty printer)
+ more-or-less assumes that it's using a monospace font. That's
+ probably not too silly an assumption, but one piece of information
+ the current implementation loses is from requests to indent by a
+ non-integral amount. As of sbcl-0.8.15.9, the system silently
+ truncates the indentation to an integer at the point of request, but
+ maybe the non-integral value should be propagated through the
+ pprinter and only truncated at output? (So that indenting by 1/2
+ then 3/2 would indent by two spaces, not one?)
+
+352: forward-referenced-class trouble
+ reported by Bruno Haible on sbcl-devel
+ (defclass c (a) ())
+ (setf (class-name (find-class 'a)) 'b)
+ (defclass a () (x))
+ (defclass b () (y))
+ (make-instance 'c)
+ Expected: an instance of c, with a slot named x
+ Got: debugger invoked on a SIMPLE-ERROR in thread 78906:
+ While computing the class precedence list of the class named C.
+ The class named B is a forward referenced class.
+ The class named B is a direct superclass of the class named C.
+
+ [ Is this actually a bug? DEFCLASS only replaces an existing class
+ when the class name is the proper name of that class, and in the
+ above code the class found by (FIND-CLASS 'A) does not have a
+ proper name. CSR, 2006-08-07 ]
+
+353: debugger suboptimalities on x86
+ On x86 backtraces for undefined functions start with a bogus stack
+ frame, and backtraces for throws to unknown catch tags with a "no
+ debug information" frame. These are both due to CODE-COMPONENT-FROM-BITS
+ (used on non-x86 platforms) being a more complete solution then what
+ is done on x86.
+
+ On x86/linux large portions of tests/debug.impure.lisp have been commented
+ out as failures. The probable culprit for these problems is in x86-call-context
+ (things work fine on x86/freebsd).
+
+ More generally, the debugger internals suffer from excessive x86/non-x86
+ conditionalization and OAOOMization: refactoring the common parts would
+ be good.
+
+354: XEPs in backtraces
+ Under default compilation policy
+ (defun test ()
+ (throw :unknown t))
+ (test)
+ Has the XEP for TEST in the backtrace, not the TEST frame itself.
+ (sparc and x86 at least)
+
+ Since SBCL 0.8.20.1 this is hidden unless *SHOW-ENTRY-POINT-DETAILS*
+ is true (instead there appear two TEST frames at least on ppc). The
+ underlying cause seems to be that SB-C::TAIL-ANNOTATE will not merge
+ the tail-call for the XEP, since Python has by that time proved that
+ the function can never return; same happens if the function holds an
+ unconditional call to ERROR.
+
+356: PCL corruption
+ (reported by Bruno Haible)
+ After the "layout depth conflict" error, the CLOS is left in a state where
+ it's not possible to define new standard-class subclasses any more.
+ Test case:
+ (defclass prioritized-dispatcher ()
+ ((dependents :type list :initform nil)))
+ (defmethod sb-pcl:validate-superclass ((c1 sb-pcl:funcallable-standard-class)
+ (c2 (eql (find-class 'prioritized-dispatcher))))
+ t)
+ (defclass prioritized-generic-function (prioritized-dispatcher standard-generic-function)
+ ()
+ (:metaclass sb-pcl:funcallable-standard-class))
+ ;; ERROR, Quit the debugger with ABORT
+ (defclass typechecking-reader-class (standard-class)
+ ())
+ Expected: #<STANDARD-CLASS TYPECHECKING-READER-CLASS>
+ Got: ERROR "The assertion SB-PCL::WRAPPERS failed."
+
+ [ This test case does not cause the error any more. However,
+ similar problems can be observed with
+
+ (defclass foo (standard-class) ()
+ (:metaclass sb-mop:funcallable-standard-class))
+ (sb-mop:finalize-inheritance (find-class 'foo))
+ ;; ERROR, ABORT
+ (defclass bar (standard-class) ())
+ (make-instance 'bar)
+ ]
+
+357: defstruct inheritance of initforms
+ (reported by Bruno Haible)
+ When defstruct and defclass (with :metaclass structure-class) are mixed,
+ 1. some slot initforms are ignored by the DEFSTRUCT generated constructor
+ function, and
+ 2. all slot initforms are ignored by MAKE-INSTANCE. (This can be arguably
+ OK for initforms that were given in a DEFSTRUCT form, but for those
+ given in a DEFCLASS form, I think it qualifies as a bug.)
+ Test case:
+ (defstruct structure02a
+ slot1
+ (slot2 t)
+ (slot3 (floor pi)))
+ (defclass structure02b (structure02a)
+ ((slot4 :initform -44)
+ (slot5)
+ (slot6 :initform t)
+ (slot7 :initform (floor (* pi pi)))
+ (slot8 :initform 88))
+ (:metaclass structure-class))
+ (defstruct (structure02c (:include structure02b (slot8 -88)))
+ slot9
+ (slot10 t)
+ (slot11 (floor (exp 3))))
+ ;; 1. Form:
+ (let ((a (make-structure02c)))
+ (list (structure02c-slot4 a)
+ (structure02c-slot5 a)
+ (structure02c-slot6 a)
+ (structure02c-slot7 a)))
+ Expected: (-44 nil t 9)
+ Got: (SB-PCL::..SLOT-UNBOUND.. SB-PCL::..SLOT-UNBOUND..
+ SB-PCL::..SLOT-UNBOUND.. SB-PCL::..SLOT-UNBOUND..)
+ ;; 2. Form:
+ (let ((b (make-instance 'structure02c)))
+ (list (structure02c-slot2 b)
+ (structure02c-slot3 b)
+ (structure02c-slot4 b)
+ (structure02c-slot6 b)
+ (structure02c-slot7 b)
+ (structure02c-slot8 b)
+ (structure02c-slot10 b)
+ (structure02c-slot11 b)))
+ Expected: (t 3 -44 t 9 -88 t 20)
+ Got: (0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0)
+
+359: wrong default value for ensure-generic-function's :generic-function-class argument
+ (reported by Bruno Haible)
+ ANSI CL is silent on this, but the MOP's specification of ENSURE-GENERIC-FUNCTION says:
+ "The remaining arguments are the complete set of keyword arguments
+ received by ENSURE-GENERIC-FUNCTION."
+ and the spec of ENSURE-GENERIC-FUNCTION-USING-CLASS:
+ ":GENERIC-FUNCTION-CLASS - a class metaobject or a class name. If it is not
+ supplied, it defaults to the class named STANDARD-GENERIC-FUNCTION."
+ This is not the case in SBCL. Test case:
+ (defclass my-generic-function (standard-generic-function)
+ ()
+ (:metaclass sb-pcl:funcallable-standard-class))
+ (setf (fdefinition 'foo1)
+ (make-instance 'my-generic-function :name 'foo1))
+ (ensure-generic-function 'foo1
+ :generic-function-class (find-class 'standard-generic-function))
+ (class-of #'foo1)
+ ; => #<SB-MOP:FUNCALLABLE-STANDARD-CLASS STANDARD-GENERIC-FUNCTION>
+ (setf (fdefinition 'foo2)
+ (make-instance 'my-generic-function :name 'foo2))
+ (ensure-generic-function 'foo2)
+ (class-of #'foo2)
+ Expected: #<SB-MOP:FUNCALLABLE-STANDARD-CLASS STANDARD-GENERIC-FUNCTION>
+ Got: #<SB-MOP:FUNCALLABLE-STANDARD-CLASS MY-GENERIC-FUNCTION>
+
+362: missing error when a slot-definition is created without a name
+ (reported by Bruno Haible)
+ The MOP says about slot-definition initialization:
+ "The :NAME argument is a slot name. An ERROR is SIGNALled if this argument
+ is not a symbol which can be used as a variable name. An ERROR is SIGNALled
+ if this argument is not supplied."
+ Test case:
+ (make-instance (find-class 'sb-pcl:standard-direct-slot-definition))
+ Expected: ERROR
+ Got: #<SB-MOP:STANDARD-DIRECT-SLOT-DEFINITION NIL>
+
+363: missing error when a slot-definition is created with a wrong documentation object
+ (reported by Bruno Haible)
+ The MOP says about slot-definition initialization:
+ "The :DOCUMENTATION argument is a STRING or NIL. An ERROR is SIGNALled
+ if it is not. This argument default to NIL during initialization."
+ Test case:
+ (make-instance (find-class 'sb-pcl:standard-direct-slot-definition)
+ :name 'foo
+ :documentation 'not-a-string)
+ Expected: ERROR
+ Got: #<SB-MOP:STANDARD-DIRECT-SLOT-DEFINITION FOO>
+
+369: unlike-an-intersection behavior of VALUES-TYPE-INTERSECTION
+ In sbcl-0.8.18.2, the identity $(x \cap y \cap y)=(x \cap y)$
+ does not hold for VALUES-TYPE-INTERSECTION, even for types which
+ can be intersected exactly, so that ASSERTs fail in this test case: