+135:
+ Ideally, uninterning a symbol would allow it, and its associated
+ FDEFINITION and PROCLAIM data, to be reclaimed by the GC. However,
+ at least as of sbcl-0.7.0, this isn't the case. Information about
+ FDEFINITIONs and PROCLAIMed properties is stored in globaldb.lisp
+ essentially in ordinary (non-weak) hash tables keyed by symbols.
+ Thus, once a system has an entry in this system, it tends to live
+ forever, even when it is uninterned and all other references to it
+ are lost.
+
+141: "pretty printing and backquote"
+ a.
+ * '``(FOO ,@',@S)
+ ``(FOO SB-IMPL::BACKQ-COMMA-AT S)
+
+ b. (fixed in 0.8.4.7)
+
+143:
+ (reported by Jesse Bouwman 2001-10-24 through the unfortunately
+ prominent SourceForge web/db bug tracking system, which is
+ unfortunately not a reliable way to get a timely response from
+ the SBCL maintainers)
+ In the course of trying to build a test case for an
+ application error, I encountered this behavior:
+ If you start up sbcl, and then lay on CTRL-C for a
+ minute or two, the lisp process will eventually say:
+ %PRIMITIVE HALT called; the party is over.
+ and throw you into the monitor. If I start up lisp,
+ attach to the process with strace, and then do the same
+ (abusive) thing, I get instead:
+ access failure in heap page not marked as write-protected
+ and the monitor again. I don't know enough to have the
+ faintest idea of what is going on here.
+ This is with sbcl 6.12, uname -a reports:
+ Linux prep 2.2.19 #4 SMP Tue Apr 24 13:59:52 CDT 2001 i686 unknown
+ I (WHN) have verified that the same thing occurs on sbcl-0.pre7.141
+ under OpenBSD 2.9 on my X86 laptop. Do be patient when you try it:
+ 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
+ upgraded to do so. (This doesn't seem to be a high priority
+ conformance problem, since seems hard to construct useful code
+ where it matters.)
+
+ b. (fixed in 0.8.3.43)
+
+146:
+ Floating point errors are reported poorly. E.g. on x86 OpenBSD
+ with sbcl-0.7.1,
+ * (expt 2.0 12777)
+ debugger invoked on condition of type SB-KERNEL:FLOATING-POINT-EXCEPTION:
+ An arithmetic error SB-KERNEL:FLOATING-POINT-EXCEPTION was signalled.
+ No traps are enabled? How can this be?
+ It should be possible to be much more specific (overflow, division
+ by zero, etc.) and of course the "How can this be?" should be fixable.
+
+ See also bugs #45.c and #183
+
+162:
+ (reported by Robert E. Brown 2002-04-16)
+ When a function is called with too few arguments, causing the
+ debugger to be entered, the uninitialized slots in the bad call frame
+ seem to cause GCish problems, being interpreted as tagged data even
+ though they're not. In particular, executing ROOM in the
+ debugger at that point causes AVER failures:
+ * (machine-type)
+ "X86"
+ * (lisp-implementation-version)
+ "0.7.2.12"
+ * (typep 10)
+ ...
+ 0] (room)
+ ...
+ failed AVER: "(SAP= CURRENT END)"
+ (Christophe Rhodes reports that this doesn't occur on the SPARC, which
+ isn't too surprising since there are many differences in stack
+ implementation and GC conservatism between the X86 and other ports.)
+
+ This is probably the same bug as 216
+
+167:
+ In sbcl-0.7.3.11, compiling the (illegal) code
+ (in-package :cl-user)
+ (defmethod prove ((uustk uustk))
+ (zap ((frob () nil))
+ (frob)))
+ gives the (not terribly clear) error message
+ ; caught ERROR:
+ ; (during macroexpansion of (DEFMETHOD PROVE ...))
+ ; can't get template for (FROB NIL NIL)
+ The problem seems to be that the code walker used by the DEFMETHOD
+ macro is unhappy with the illegal syntax in the method body, and
+ is giving an unclear error message.
+
+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.
+
+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)
+
+188: "compiler performance fiasco involving type inference and UNION-TYPE"
+ (time (compile
+ nil
+ '(lambda ()
+ (declare (optimize (safety 3)))
+ (declare (optimize (compilation-speed 2)))
+ (declare (optimize (speed 1) (debug 1) (space 1)))
+ (let ((start 4))
+ (declare (type (integer 0) start))
+ (print (incf start 22))
+ (print (incf start 26))
+ (print (incf start 28)))
+ (let ((start 6))
+ (declare (type (integer 0) start))
+ (print (incf start 22))
+ (print (incf start 26)))
+ (let ((start 10))
+ (declare (type (integer 0) start))
+ (print (incf start 22))
+ (print (incf start 26))))))
+
+ This example could be solved with clever enough constraint
+ propagation or with SSA, but consider
+
+ (let ((x 0))
+ (loop (incf x 2)))
+
+ The careful type of X is {2k} :-(. Is it really important to be
+ able to work with unions of many intervals?
+
+190: "PPC/Linux pipe? buffer? bug"
+ In sbcl-0.7.6, the run-program.test.sh test script sometimes hangs
+ on the PPC/Linux platform, waiting for a zombie env process. This
+ is a classic symptom of buffer filling and deadlock, but it seems
+ only sporadically reproducible.
+
+191: "Miscellaneous PCL deficiencies"
+ (reported by Alexey Dejneka sbcl-devel 2002-08-04)
+ a. DEFCLASS does not inform the compiler about generated
+ functions. Compiling a file with
+ (DEFCLASS A-CLASS ()
+ ((A-CLASS-X)))
+ (DEFUN A-CLASS-X (A)
+ (WITH-SLOTS (A-CLASS-X) A
+ A-CLASS-X))
+ results in a STYLE-WARNING:
+ undefined-function
+ SB-SLOT-ACCESSOR-NAME::|COMMON-LISP-USER A-CLASS-X slot READER|
+
+ APD's fix for this was checked in to sbcl-0.7.6.20, but Pierre
+ Mai points out that the declamation of functions is in fact
+ incorrect in some cases (most notably for structure
+ classes). This means that at present erroneous attempts to use
+ WITH-SLOTS and the like on classes with metaclass STRUCTURE-CLASS
+ won't get the corresponding STYLE-WARNING.
+ c. (fixed in 0.8.4.23)
+
+201: "Incautious type inference from compound types"
+ a. (reported by APD sbcl-devel 2002-09-17)
+ (DEFUN FOO (X)
+ (LET ((Y (CAR (THE (CONS INTEGER *) X))))
+ (SETF (CAR X) NIL)
+ (FORMAT NIL "~S IS ~S, Y = ~S"
+ (CAR X)
+ (TYPECASE (CAR X)
+ (INTEGER 'INTEGER)
+ (T '(NOT INTEGER)))
+ Y)))
+
+ (FOO ' (1 . 2)) => "NIL IS INTEGER, Y = 1"
+
+ b.
+ * (defun foo (x)
+ (declare (type (array * (4 4)) x))
+ (let ((y x))
+ (setq x (make-array '(4 4)))
+ (adjust-array y '(3 5))
+ (= (array-dimension y 0) (eval `(array-dimension ,y 0)))))
+ FOO
+ * (foo (make-array '(4 4) :adjustable t))
+ NIL
+
+205: "environment issues in cross compiler"
+ (These bugs have no impact on user code, but should be fixed or
+ documented.)
+ a. Macroexpanders introduced with MACROLET are defined in the null
+ lexical environment.
+ b. The body of (EVAL-WHEN (:COMPILE-TOPLEVEL) ...) is evaluated in
+ the null lexical environment.
+ c. The cross-compiler cannot inline functions defined in a non-null
+ lexical environment.
+
+206: ":SB-FLUID feature broken"
+ (reported by Antonio Martinez-Shotton sbcl-devel 2002-10-07)
+ Enabling :SB-FLUID in the target-features list in sbcl-0.7.8 breaks
+ the build.
+
+207: "poorly distributed SXHASH results for compound data"
+ SBCL's SXHASH could probably try a little harder. ANSI: "the
+ intent is that an implementation should make a good-faith
+ effort to produce hash-codes that are well distributed
+ within the range of non-negative fixnums". But
+ (let ((hits (make-hash-table)))
+ (dotimes (i 16)
+ (dotimes (j 16)
+ (let* ((ij (cons i j))
+ (newlist (push ij (gethash (sxhash ij) hits))))
+ (when (cdr newlist)
+ (format t "~&collision: ~S~%" newlist))))))
+ reports lots of collisions in sbcl-0.7.8. A stronger MIX function
+ would be an obvious way of fix. Maybe it would be acceptably efficient
+ to redo MIX using a lookup into a 256-entry s-box containing
+ 29-bit pseudorandom numbers?
+
+211: "keywords processing"
+ a. :ALLOW-OTHER-KEYS T should allow a function to receive an odd
+ number of keyword arguments.
+ e. Compiling
+
+ (flet ((foo (&key y) (list y)))
+ (list (foo :y 1 :y 2)))
+
+ issues confusing message
+
+ ; in: LAMBDA NIL
+ ; (FOO :Y 1 :Y 2)
+ ;
+ ; caught STYLE-WARNING:
+ ; The variable #:G15 is defined but never used.
+
+212: "Sequence functions and circular arguments"
+ COERCE, MERGE and CONCATENATE go into an infinite loop when given
+ circular arguments; it would be good for the user if they could be
+ given an error instead (ANSI 17.1.1 allows this behaviour on the part
+ of the implementation, as conforming code cannot give non-proper
+ sequences to these functions. MAP also has this problem (and
+ solution), though arguably the convenience of being able to do
+ (MAP 'LIST '+ FOO '#1=(1 . #1#))
+ might be classed as more important (though signalling an error when
+ all of the arguments are circular is probably desireable).
+
+213: "Sequence functions and type checking"
+ a. (fixed in 0.8.4.36)
+ b. MAP, when given a type argument that is SUBTYPEP LIST, does not
+ check that it will return a sequence of the given type. Fixing
+ it along the same lines as the others (cf. work done around
+ sbcl-0.7.8.45) is possible, but doing so efficiently didn't look
+ entirely straightforward.
+ c. All of these functions will silently accept a type of the form
+ (CONS INTEGER *)
+ whether or not the return value is of this type. This is
+ probably permitted by ANSI (see "Exceptional Situations" under
+ ANSI MAKE-SEQUENCE), but the DERIVE-TYPE mechanism does not
+ know about this escape clause, so code of the form
+ (INTEGERP (CAR (MAKE-SEQUENCE '(CONS INTEGER *) 2)))
+ can erroneously return T.
+
+215: ":TEST-NOT handling by functions"
+ a. FIND and POSITION currently signal errors when given non-NIL for
+ both their :TEST and (deprecated) :TEST-NOT arguments, but by
+ ANSI 17.2 "the consequences are unspecified", which by ANSI 1.4.2
+ means that the effect is "unpredictable but harmless". It's not
+ clear what that actually means; it may preclude conforming
+ implementations from signalling errors.
+ b. COUNT, REMOVE and the like give priority to a :TEST-NOT argument
+ when conflict occurs. As a quality of implementation issue, it
+ might be preferable to treat :TEST and :TEST-NOT as being in some
+ sense the same &KEY, and effectively take the first test function in
+ the argument list.
+ c. Again, a quality of implementation issue: it would be good to issue a
+ STYLE-WARNING at compile-time for calls with :TEST-NOT, and a
+ WARNING for calls with both :TEST and :TEST-NOT; possibly this
+ latter should be WARNed about at execute-time too.
+
+216: "debugger confused by frames with invalid number of arguments"
+ In sbcl-0.7.8.51, executing e.g. (VECTOR-PUSH-EXTEND T), BACKTRACE, Q
+ leaves the system confused, enough so that (QUIT) no longer works.
+ It's as though the process of working with the uninitialized slot in
+ the bad VECTOR-PUSH-EXTEND frame causes GC problems, though that may
+ not be the actual problem. (CMU CL 18c doesn't have problems with this.)
+
+ This is probably the same bug as 162
+
+217: "Bad type operations with FUNCTION types"
+ In sbcl.0.7.7:
+
+ * (values-type-union (specifier-type '(function (base-char)))
+ (specifier-type '(function (integer))))
+
+ #<FUN-TYPE (FUNCTION (BASE-CHAR) *)>
+
+ It causes insertion of wrong type assertions into generated
+ code. E.g.
+
+ (defun foo (x s)
+ (let ((f (etypecase x
+ (character #'write-char)
+ (integer #'write-byte))))
+ (funcall f x s)
+ (etypecase x
+ (character (write-char x s))
+ (integer (write-byte x s)))))
+
+ Then (FOO #\1 *STANDARD-OUTPUT*) signals type error.
+
+ (In 0.7.9.1 the result type is (FUNCTION * *), so Python does not
+ produce invalid code, but type checking is not accurate.)
+
+233: bugs in constraint propagation
+ b.
+ (declaim (optimize (speed 2) (safety 3)))
+ (defun foo (x y)
+ (if (typep (prog1 x (setq x y)) 'double-float)
+ (+ x 1d0)
+ (+ x 2)))
+ (foo 1d0 5) => segmentation violation
+
+235: "type system and inline expansion"
+ a.
+ (declaim (ftype (function (cons) number) acc))
+ (declaim (inline acc))
+ (defun acc (c)
+ (the number (car c)))
+
+ (defun foo (x y)
+ (values (locally (declare (optimize (safety 0)))
+ (acc x))
+ (locally (declare (optimize (safety 3)))
+ (acc y))))
+
+ (foo '(nil) '(t)) => NIL, T.
+
+237: "Environment arguments to type functions"
+ a. Functions SUBTYPEP, TYPEP, UPGRADED-ARRAY-ELEMENT-TYPE, and
+ UPGRADED-COMPLEX-PART-TYPE now have an optional environment
+ argument, but they ignore it completely. This is almost
+ certainly not correct.
+ b. Also, the compiler's optimizers for TYPEP have not been informed
+ about the new argument; consequently, they will not transform
+ calls of the form (TYPEP 1 'INTEGER NIL), even though this is
+ just as optimizeable as (TYPEP 1 'INTEGER).
+
+238: "REPL compiler overenthusiasm for CLOS code"
+ From the REPL,
+ * (defclass foo () ())
+ * (defmethod bar ((x foo) (foo foo)) (call-next-method))
+ causes approximately 100 lines of code deletion notes. Some
+ discussion on this issue happened under the title 'Three "interesting"
+ bugs in PCL', resulting in a fix for this oververbosity from the
+ compiler proper; however, the problem persists in the interactor
+ because the notion of original source is not preserved: for the
+ compiler, the original source of the above expression is (DEFMETHOD
+ BAR ((X FOO) (FOO FOO)) (CALL-NEXT-METHOD)), while by the time the
+ compiler gets its hands on the code needing compilation from the REPL,
+ it has been macroexpanded several times.
+
+ A symptom of the same underlying problem, reported by Tony Martinez:
+ * (handler-case
+ (with-input-from-string (*query-io* " no")
+ (yes-or-no-p))
+ (simple-type-error () 'error))
+ ; in: LAMBDA NIL
+ ; (SB-KERNEL:FLOAT-WAIT)
+ ;
+ ; note: deleting unreachable code
+ ; compilation unit finished
+ ; printed 1 note
+
+241: "DEFCLASS mysteriously remembers uninterned accessor names."
+ (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."
+ So it's somehow checking the uninterned old accessor name instead
+ of the new requested accessor name, which seems broken to me (WHN).
+
+242: "WRITE-SEQUENCE suboptimality"
+ (observed from clx performance)
+ In sbcl-0.7.13, WRITE-SEQUENCE of a sequence of type
+ (SIMPLE-ARRAY (UNSIGNED-BYTE 8) (*)) on a stream with element-type
+ (UNSIGNED-BYTE 8) will write to the stream one byte at a time,
+ rather than writing the sequence in one go, leading to severe
+ performance degradation.
+
+243: "STYLE-WARNING overenthusiasm for unused variables"
+ (observed from clx compilation)
+ In sbcl-0.7.14, in the presence of the macros
+ (DEFMACRO FOO (X) `(BAR ,X))
+ (DEFMACRO BAR (X) (DECLARE (IGNORABLE X)) 'NIL)
+ somewhat surprising style warnings are emitted for
+ (COMPILE NIL '(LAMBDA (Y) (FOO Y))):
+ ; in: LAMBDA (Y)
+ ; (LAMBDA (Y) (FOO Y))
+ ;
+ ; caught STYLE-WARNING:
+ ; The variable Y is defined but never used.
+
+245: bugs in disassembler
+ a. On X86 an immediate operand for IMUL is printed incorrectly.
+ b. On X86 operand size prefix is not recognized.
+
+251:
+ (defun foo (&key (a :x))
+ (declare (fixnum a))
+ a)
+
+ does not cause a warning. (BTW: old SBCL issued a warning, but for a
+ function, which was never called!)
+
+256:
+ Compiler does not emit warnings for
+
+ a. (lambda () (svref (make-array 8 :adjustable t) 1))
+
+ b. (lambda (x)
+ (list (let ((y (the real x)))
+ (unless (floatp y) (error ""))
+ y)
+ (integer-length x)))
+
+ c. (lambda (x)
+ (declare (optimize (debug 0)))
+ (declare (type vector x))
+ (list (fill-pointer x)
+ (svref x 1)))
+
+257:
+ Complex array type does not have corresponding type specifier.
+
+ This is a problem because the compiler emits optimization notes when
+ you use a non-simple array, and without a type specifier for hairy
+ array types, there's no good way to tell it you're doing it
+ intentionally so that it should shut up and just compile the code.
+
+ Another problem is confusing error message "asserted type ARRAY
+ conflicts with derived type (VALUES SIMPLE-VECTOR &OPTIONAL)" during
+ compiling (LAMBDA (V) (VALUES (SVREF V 0) (VECTOR-POP V))).
+
+ The last problem is that when type assertions are converted to type
+ checks, types are represented with type specifiers, so we could lose
+ complex attribute. (Now this is probably not important, because
+ currently checks for complex arrays seem to be performed by
+ callees.)
+
+259:
+ (compile nil '(lambda () (aref (make-array 0) 0))) compiles without
+ warning. Analogous cases with the index and length being equal and
+ greater than 0 are warned for; the problem here seems to be that the
+ type required for an array reference of this type is (INTEGER 0 (0))
+ which is canonicalized to NIL.
+
+260:
+ a.
+ (let* ((s (gensym))
+ (t1 (specifier-type s)))
+ (eval `(defstruct ,s))
+ (type= t1 (specifier-type s)))
+ => NIL, NIL
+
+ (fixed in 0.8.1.24)
+
+ b. The same for CSUBTYPEP.
+
+262: "yet another bug in inline expansion of local functions"
+ Compiler fails on
+
+ (defun foo (x y)
+ (declare (integer x y))
+ (+ (block nil
+ (flet ((xyz (u)
+ (declare (integer u))
+ (if (> (1+ (the unsigned-byte u)) 0)
+ (+ 1 u)
+ (return (+ 38 (cos (/ u 78)))))))
+ (declare (inline xyz))
+ (return-from foo
+ (* (funcall (eval #'xyz) x)
+ (if (> x 30)
+ (funcall (if (> x 5) #'xyz #'identity)
+ (+ x 13))
+ 38)))))
+ (sin (* x y))))
+
+ Urgh... It's time to write IR1-copier.
+
+266:
+ David Lichteblau provided (sbcl-devel 2003-06-01) a patch to fix
+ behaviour of streams with element-type (SIGNED-BYTE 8). The patch
+ looks reasonable, if not obviously correct; however, it caused the
+ PPC/Linux port to segfault during warm-init while loading
+ src/pcl/std-class.fasl. A workaround patch was made, but it would
+ be nice to understand why the first patch caused problems, and to
+ fix the cause if possible.
+
+268: "wrong free declaration scope"
+ The following code must signal type error:
+
+ (locally (declare (optimize (safety 3)))
+ (flet ((foo (x &optional (y (car x)))
+ (declare (optimize (safety 0)))
+ (list x y)))
+ (funcall (eval #'foo) 1)))
+
+269:
+ SCALE-FLOAT should accept any integer for its second argument.
+
+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. (fixed in 0.8.3.6)
+
+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.
+
+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
+
+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.
+
+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.
+
+296:
+ (reported by Adam Warner, sbcl-devel 2003-09-23)
+
+ The --load toplevel argument does not perform any sanitization of its
+ argument. As a result, files with Lisp pathname pattern characters
+ (#\* or #\?, for instance) or quotation marks can cause the system
+ to perform arbitrary behaviour.
+
+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.
projects / sbcl.git / blobdiff