(during macroexpansion of IN-PACKAGE,
during macroexpansion of DEFFOO)
-13:
- Floating point infinities are screwed up. [When I was converting CMU CL
- to SBCL, I was looking for complexity to delete, and I thought it was safe
- to just delete support for floating point infinities. It wasn't: they're
- generated by the floating point hardware even when we remove support
- for them in software. Also we claim the :IEEE-FLOATING-POINT feature,
- and I think that means we should support infinities.-- WHN] Support
- for them should be restored.
-
14:
The ANSI syntax for non-STANDARD method combination types in CLOS is
(DEFGENERIC FOO (X) (:METHOD-COMBINATION PROGN))
26:
reported by Sam Steingold on the cmucl-imp mailing list 12 May 2000:
-
-Also, there is another bug: `array-displacement' should return an array
-or nil as first value (as per ANSI CL), while CMUCL declares it as
-returning an array as first value always.
+ Also, there is another bug: `array-displacement' should return an
+ array or nil as first value (as per ANSI CL), while CMUCL declares
+ it as returning an array as first value always.
+ (Actually, I think the old CMU CL version in SBCL never returns NIL,
+ i.e. it's not just a declaration problem, but the definition doesn't
+ behave ANSIly.)
27:
Sometimes (SB-EXT:QUIT) fails with
45:
a slew of floating-point-related errors reported by Peter Van Eynde
on July 25, 2000:
- a: (SQRT -9.0) fails, because SB-KERNEL::COMPLEX-SQRT is undefined.
- Similarly, COMPLEX-ASIN, COMPLEX-ACOS, COMPLEX-ACOSH, and others
- aren't found.
+ a: (fixed in sbcl-0.6.11.25)
b: SBCL's value for LEAST-POSITIVE-SHORT-FLOAT is bogus, and
should probably be 1.4012985e-45. In SBCL,
(/ LEAST-POSITIVE-SHORT-FLOAT 2) returns a number smaller
(EXPT 10.0d0 1000)
PVE's regression tests want them to raise errors. SBCL
generates the infinities instead, which may or may not be
- conforming behavior, but then blow it by being unable to
- output the infinities, since support for infinities is generally
- broken, and in particular SB-IMPL::OUTPUT-FLOAT-INFINITY is
- undefined.
+ conforming behavior.
d: (in section12.erg) various forms a la
(FLOAT 1 DOUBLE-FLOAT-EPSILON)
don't give the right behavior.
#<Closure Over Function "DEFUN (SETF MACRO-FUNCTION)" {480E21B1}> was defined in a non-null environment.
58:
- (SUBTYPEP '(AND ZILCH INTEGER) 'ZILCH)
- => NIL, NIL
+ (SUBTYPEP '(AND ZILCH INTEGER) 'ZILCH) => NIL, NIL
+ Note: I looked into fixing this in 0.6.11.15, but gave up. The
+ problem seems to be that there are two relevant type methods for
+ the subtypep operation, HAIRY :COMPLEX-SUBTYPEP-ARG2 and
+ INTERSECTION :COMPLEX-SUBTYPEP-ARG1, and only the first is
+ called. This could be fixed, but type dispatch is messy and
+ confusing enough already, I don't want to complicate it further.
+ Perhaps someday we can make CLOS cross-compiled (instead of compiled
+ after bootstrapping) so that we don't need to have the type system
+ available before CLOS, and then we can rewrite the type methods to
+ CLOS methods, and then expressing the solutions to stuff like this
+ should become much more straightforward. -- WHN 2001-03-14
59:
CL:*DEFAULT-PATHNAME-DEFAULTS* doesn't behave as ANSI suggests (reflecting
(I haven't tried to investigate this bug enough to guess whether
there might be any user-level symptoms.)
+90:
+ a latent cross-compilation/bootstrapping bug: The cross-compilation
+ host's CL:CHAR-CODE-LIMIT is used in target code in readtable.lisp
+ and possibly elsewhere. Instead, we should use the target system's
+ CHAR-CODE-LIMIT. This will probably cause problems if we try to
+ bootstrap on a system which uses a different value of CHAR-CODE-LIMIT
+ than SBCL does.
+
+91:
+ (subtypep '(or (integer -1 1)
+ unsigned-byte)
+ '(or (rational -1 7)
+ unsigned-byte
+ (integer -1 1))) => NIL,T
+ An analogous problem with SINGLE-FLOAT and REAL types was fixed in
+ sbcl-0.6.11.22, but some peculiarites of the RATIO type make it
+ awkward to generalize the fix to INTEGER and RATIONAL. It's not
+ clear what's the best fix. (See the "bug in type handling" discussion
+ on cmucl-imp ca. 2001-03-22 and ca. 2001-02-12.)
+
+93:
+ In sbcl-0.6.11.26, (COMPILE 'IN-HOST-COMPILATION-MODE) in
+ src/cold/shared.lisp doesn't correctly translate the
+ interpreted function
+ (defun in-host-compilation-mode (fn)
+ (let ((*features* (cons :sb-xc-host *features*))
+ ;; the CROSS-FLOAT-INFINITY-KLUDGE, as documented in
+ ;; base-target-features.lisp-expr:
+ (*shebang-features* (set-difference *shebang-features*
+ '(:sb-propagate-float-type
+ :sb-propagate-fun-type))))
+ (with-additional-nickname ("SB-XC" "SB!XC")
+ (funcall fn))))
+ No error is reported by the compiler, but when the function is executed,
+ it causes an error
+ TYPE-ERROR in SB-KERNEL::OBJECT-NOT-TYPE-ERROR-HANDLER:
+ (:LINUX :X86 :IEEE-FLOATING-POINT :SB-CONSTRAIN-FLOAT-TYPE :SB-TEST
+ :SB-INTERPRETER :SB-DOC :UNIX ...) is not of type SYMBOL.
+
+94a:
+ Inconsistencies between derived and declared VALUES return types for
+ DEFUN aren't checked very well. E.g. the logic which successfully
+ catches problems like
+ (declaim (ftype (function (fixnum) float) foo))
+ (defun foo (x)
+ (declare (type integer x))
+ (values x)) ; wrong return type, detected, gives warning, good!
+ fails to catch
+ (declaim (ftype (function (t) (values t t)) bar))
+ (defun bar (x)
+ (values x)) ; wrong number of return values, no warning, bad!
+ The cause of this is seems to be that (1) the internal function
+ VALUES-TYPES-EQUAL-OR-INTERSECT used to make the check handles its
+ arguments symmetrically, and (2) when the type checking code was
+ written back when when SBCL's code was still CMU CL, the intent
+ was that this case
+ (declaim (ftype (function (t) t) bar))
+ (defun bar (x)
+ (values x x)) ; wrong number of return values; should give warning?
+ not be warned for, because a two-valued return value is considered
+ to be compatible with callers who expects a single value to be
+ returned. That intent is probably not appropriate for modern ANSI
+ Common Lisp, but fixing this might be complicated because of other
+ divergences between auld-style and new-style handling of
+ multiple-VALUES types. (Some issues related to this were discussed
+ on cmucl-imp at some length sometime in 2000.)
+
+95:
+ The facility for dumping a running Lisp image to disk gets confused
+ when run without the PURIFY option, and creates an unnecessarily large
+ core file (apparently representing memory usage up to the previous
+ high-water mark). Moreover, when the file is loaded, it confuses the
+ GC, so that thereafter memory usage can never be reduced below that
+ level.
+
+96:
+ The TRACE facility can't be used on some kinds of functions.
+ Basically, the breakpoint facility wasn incompletely implemented
+ in the X86 port of CMU CL, and we haven't fixed it in SBCL.
+
+97:
+ FRESH-LINE doesn't seem to work properly within pretty-printed
+ output. E.g.
+ "~@<unhandled CONDITION (of type ~S): ~2I~_~A~:>~2%"
+ called on a CONDITION whose printer does
+ "~&~@<error in function ~S: ~3I~:_~?~:>"
+ gives two newlines between "unhandled CONDITION" and "error", when
+ (it at least seems as though) correct behavior would be to give one.
+
KNOWN BUGS RELATED TO THE IR1 INTERPRETER
projects / sbcl.git / blobdiff