an error may be signalled at read time and it would be good if
SBCL did it.
- c: Reading of not initialized slot sometimes causes SEGV (for inline
- accessors it is fixed, but out-of-line still do not perform type
- check).
-
- d:
- (declaim (optimize (safety 3) (speed 1) (space 1)))
- (defstruct foo
- x y)
- (defstruct (stringwise-foo (:include foo
- (x "x" :type simple-string)
- (y "y" :type simple-string))))
- (defparameter *stringwise-foo*
- (make-stringwise-foo))
- (setf (foo-x *stringwise-foo*) 0)
- (defun frob-stringwise-foo (sf)
- (aref (stringwise-foo-x sf) 0))
- (frob-stringwise-foo *stringwise-foo*)
- SEGV.
+ d: (fixed in 0.8.1.5)
7:
The "compiling top-level form:" output ought to be condensed.
See also bugs #45.c and #183
-148:
- In sbcl-0.7.1.3 on x86, COMPILE-FILE on the file
- (in-package :cl-user)
- (defvar *thing*)
- (defvar *zoom*)
- (defstruct foo bar bletch)
- (defun %zeep ()
- (labels ((kidify1 (kid)
- )
- (kid-frob (kid)
- (if *thing*
- (setf sweptm
- (m+ (frobnicate kid)
- sweptm))
- (kidify1 kid))))
- (declare (inline kid-frob))
- (map nil
- #'kid-frob
- (the simple-vector (foo-bar perd)))))
- fails with
- debugger invoked on condition of type TYPE-ERROR:
- The value NIL is not of type SB-C::NODE.
- The location of this failure has moved around as various related
- issues were cleaned up. As of sbcl-0.7.1.9, it occurs in
- NODE-BLOCK called by LAMBDA-COMPONENT called by IR2-CONVERT-CLOSURE.
-
- (Python LET-converts KIDIFY1 into KID-FROB, then tries to inline
- expand KID-FROB into %ZEEP. Having partially done it, it sees a call
- of KIDIFY1, which already does not exist. So it gives up on
- expansion, leaving garbage consisting of infinished blocks of the
- partially converted function.)
-
- (due to reordering of the compiler this example is compiled
- successfully by 0.7.14, but the bug probably remains)
-
162:
(reported by Robert E. Brown 2002-04-16)
When a function is called with too few arguments, causing the
propagation or with SSA, but consider
(let ((x 0))
- (loop (if (random-boolean)
- (incf x 2)
- (incf x 5))))
+ (loop (incf x 2)))
- The careful type of X is {2k+5n} :-(. Is it really important to be
+ 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"
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
+ 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.
-258: "TYPE-ERROR when recursive LABELS function is declared INLINE"
- The compiler does emit a helpful
- ; note: couldn't inline expand because expansion calls this
- ; LET-converted local function:
- ; "LABELS COMMON-LISP-USER::C.FROB"
- but still shouldn't fail with a TYPE-ERROR
- The value NIL is not of type SB-C::NODE.
- when compiling
- (cl:in-package :cl-user)
- (declaim (optimize (safety 3) (speed 2) (space 1)))
- (defvar *foo*)
- (defvar *bar*)
- (defun u-b-sra (x r ad0 &optional ad1 &rest ad-list)
- (labels ((c.frob (c0)
- (let ()
- (when *foo*
- (vector-push-extend c0 *bar*))))
- (ad.frob (ad)
- (if *foo*
- (map nil #'ad.frob (the (vector t) *bar*))
- (dolist (b *bar*)
- (c.frob b)))))
- (declare (inline c.frob ad.frob)) ; 'til DYNAMIC-EXTENT
- (ad.frob ad0)))
+ 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.
+
+261:
+ * (let () (list (the (values &optional fixnum) (eval '(values)))))
+ debugger invoked on condition of type TYPE-ERROR:
+ The value NIL is not of type FIXNUM.
+
+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.
+
+262:
+ In 0.8.1.32:
+
+ * (ensure-generic-function 'foo)
+ #<STANDARD-GENERIC-FUNCTION FOO (0)>
+ * (defmethod foo (x) x)
+ debugger invoked on condition of type SIMPLE-ERROR:
+ The generic function #<STANDARD-GENERIC-FUNCTION FOO (0)> takes 0 required
+ arguments; was asked to find a method with specializers (#<BUILT-IN-CLASS T>)
+
+ AMOP seems to say that it should work (first ADD-METHOD initializes
+ GF lambda list).
+
+264:
+ (reported by <dsk> on #lisp 2003-07-16)
+
+ (progv '(foo) '(1)
+ (eval '(symbol-macrolet ((foo 3))
+ (declare (special foo))
+ foo)))
+
+ does not signal an error.
+
+ (fixed in 0.8.1.37)
+
+265:
+ SB-EXT:RUN-PROGRAM is currently non-functional on Linux/PPC;
+ attempting to use it leads to segmentation violations. This is
+ probably because of a bogus implementation of
+ os_restore_fp_control().
DEFUNCT CATEGORIES OF BUGS
IR1-#:
projects / sbcl.git / blobdiff