And as long as we're wishing, it would be awfully nice if INSPECT could
also report on closures, telling about the values of the bound variables.
+ Currently INSPECT and DESCRIBE do show the values, but showing the
+ names of the bindings would be even nicer.
+
35:
The compiler assumes that any time a function of declared FTYPE
doesn't signal an error, its arguments were of the declared type.
around the same time regarding a call to LIST on sparc with 1000
arguments) and other implementation limit constants.
-311: "Tokeniser not thread-safe"
- (see also Robert Marlow sbcl-help "Multi threaded read chucking a
- spak" 2004-04-19)
- The tokenizer's use of *read-buffer* and *read-buffer-length* causes
- spurious errors should two threads attempt to tokenise at the same
- time.
-
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.
method is applicable, and yet matches neither of the method group
qualifier patterns.
-341: PPRINT-LOGICAL-BLOCK / PPRINT-FILL / PPRINT-LINEAR sharing detection.
- (from Paul Dietz' test suite)
-
- CLHS on PPRINT-LINEAR and PPRINT-FILL (and PPRINT-TABULAR, though
- that's slightly different) states that these functions perform
- circular and shared structure detection on their object. Therefore,
-
- a.(let ((*print-circle* t))
- (pprint-linear *standard-output* (let ((x '(a))) (list x x))))
- should print "(#1=(A) #1#)"
-
- b.(let ((*print-circle* t))
- (pprint-linear *standard-output*
- (let ((x (cons nil nil))) (setf (cdr x) x) x)))
- should print "#1=(NIL . #1#)"
-
- (it is likely that the fault lies in PPRINT-LOGICAL-BLOCK, as
- suggested by the suggested implementation of PPRINT-TABULAR)
-
343: MOP:COMPUTE-DISCRIMINATING-FUNCTION overriding causes error
Even the simplest possible overriding of
COMPUTE-DISCRIMINATING-FUNCTION, suggested in the PCL implementation
getting less ambitious about detecting shared list structure, or
implementing the moral equivalent of EQUAL hash tables in a
cycle-tolerant way.
+
+382: externalization unexpectedly changes array simplicity
+ COMPILE-FILE and LOAD
+ (defun foo ()
+ (let ((x #.(make-array 4 :fill-pointer 0)))
+ (values (eval `(typep ',x 'simple-array))
+ (typep x 'simple-array))))
+ then (FOO) => T, NIL.
+
+ Similar problems exist with SIMPLE-ARRAY-P, ARRAY-HEADER accessors
+ and all array dimension functions.
+
+383: ASH'ing non-constant zeros
+ Compiling
+ (lambda (b)
+ (declare (type (integer -2 14) b))
+ (declare (ignorable b))
+ (ash (imagpart b) 57))
+ on PPC (and other platforms, presumably) gives an error during the
+ emission of FASH-ASH-LEFT/FIXNUM=>FIXNUM as the assembler attempts to
+ stuff a too-large constant into the immediate field of a PPC
+ instruction. Either the VOP should be fixed or the compiler should be
+ taught how to transform this case away, paying particular attention
+ to side-effects that might occur in the arguments to ASH.
+
+384: Compiler runaway on very large character types
+
+ (compile nil '(lambda (x)
+ (declare (type (member #\a 1) x))
+ (the (member 1 nil) x)))
+
+ The types apparently normalize into a very large type, and the compiler
+ gets lost in REMOVE-DUPLICATES. Perhaps the latter should use
+ a better algorithm (one based on hash tables, say) on very long lists
+ when :TEST has its default value?
+
+ A simpler example:
+
+ (compile nil '(lambda (x) (the (not (eql #\a)) x)))
+
+ (partially fixed in 0.9.3.1, but a better representation for these
+ types is needed.)
+
+385:
+ (format nil "~4,1F" 0.001) => "0.00" (should be " 0.0");
+ (format nil "~4,1@F" 0.001) => "+.00" (should be "+0.0").
+
+386: SunOS/x86 stack exhaustion handling broken
+ According to <http://alfa.s145.xrea.com/sbcl/solaris-x86.html>, the
+ stack exhaustion checking (implemented with a write-protected guard
+ page) does not work on SunOS/x86.
+
+387:
+ 12:10 < jsnell> the package-lock test is basically due to a change in the test
+ behaviour when you install a handler for error around it. I
+ thought I'd disabled the test for now, but apparently that was
+ my imagination
+ 12:19 < Xophe> jsnell: ah, I see the problem in the package-locks stuff
+ 12:19 < Xophe> it's the same problem as we had with compiler-error conditions
+ 12:19 < Xophe> the thing that's signalled up and down the stack is a subtype of
+ ERROR, where it probably shouldn't be
+
+388:
+ (found by Dmitry Bogomolov)
+
+ (defclass foo () ((x :type (unsigned-byte 8))))
+ (defclass bar () ((x :type symbol)))
+ (defclass baz (foo bar) ())
+
+ causes error
+
+ SB-PCL::SPECIALIZER-APPLICABLE-USING-TYPE-P cannot handle the second argument
+ (UNSIGNED-BYTE 8).
+
+389:
+ (reported several times on sbcl-devel, by Rick Taube, Brian Rowe and
+ others)
+
+ ROUND-NUMERIC-BOUND assumes that float types always have a FORMAT
+ specifying whether they're SINGLE or DOUBLE. This is true for types
+ computed by the type system itself, but the compiler type derivation
+ short-circuits this and constructs non-canonical types. A temporary
+ fix was made to ROUND-NUMERIC-BOUND for the sbcl-0.9.6 release, but
+ the right fix is to remove the abstraction violation in the
+ compiler's type deriver.
projects / sbcl.git / blobdiff