0.7.11.10:

[sbcl.git] / BUGS

diff --git a/BUGS b/BUGS
index 0c1771c..c9216c7 100644 (file)
--- a/BUGS
+++ b/BUGS
@@ -43,6 +43,7 @@ KNOWN BUGS OF NO SPECIAL CLASS:
   SBCL to wager that this (undefined in ANSI) operation would be safe.
 
 3:
+  a:
   ANSI specifies that a type mismatch in a structure slot
   initialization value should not cause a warning.
 WORKAROUND:
@@ -78,6 +79,11 @@ WORKAROUND:
   Such code should compile without complaint and work correctly either
   on SBCL or on any other completely compliant Common Lisp system.
 
+  b: &AUX argument in a boa-constructor without a default value means
+     "do not initilize this slot" and does not cause type error. But
+     an error may be signalled at read time and it would be good if
+     SBCL did it.
+
 6:
   bogus warnings about undefined functions for magic functions like
   SB!C::%%DEFUN and SB!C::%DEFCONSTANT when cross-compiling files
@@ -293,40 +299,6 @@ WORKAROUND:
   then requesting a BACKTRACE at the debugger prompt gives no information
   about where in the user program the problem occurred.
 
-62:
-  The compiler is supposed to do type inference well enough that 
-  the declaration in
-    (TYPECASE X
-      ((SIMPLE-ARRAY SINGLE-FLOAT)
-       (LOCALLY
-         (DECLARE (TYPE (SIMPLE-ARRAY SINGLE-FLOAT) X))
-         ..))
-      ..)
-  is redundant. However, as reported by Juan Jose Garcia Ripoll for
-  CMU CL, it sometimes doesn't. Adding declarations is a pretty good
-  workaround for the problem for now, but can't be done by the TYPECASE
-  macros themselves, since it's too hard for the macro to detect
-  assignments to the variable within the clause. 
-    Note: The compiler *is* smart enough to do the type inference in
-  many cases. This case, derived from a couple of MACROEXPAND-1
-  calls on Ripoll's original test case,
-    (DEFUN NEGMAT (A)
-      (DECLARE (OPTIMIZE SPEED (SAFETY 0)))
-      (COND ((TYPEP A '(SIMPLE-ARRAY SINGLE-FLOAT)) NIL
-             (LET ((LENGTH (ARRAY-TOTAL-SIZE A)))
-               (LET ((I 0) (G2554 LENGTH))
-                 (DECLARE (TYPE REAL G2554) (TYPE REAL I))
-                 (TAGBODY
-                  SB-LOOP::NEXT-LOOP
-                  (WHEN (>= I G2554) (GO SB-LOOP::END-LOOP))
-                  (SETF (ROW-MAJOR-AREF A I) (- (ROW-MAJOR-AREF A I)))
-                  (GO SB-LOOP::NEXT-LOOP)
-                  SB-LOOP::END-LOOP))))))
-  demonstrates the problem; but the problem goes away if the TAGBODY
-  and GO forms are removed (leaving the SETF in ordinary, non-looping
-  code), or if the TAGBODY and GO forms are retained, but the 
-  assigned value becomes 0.0 instead of (- (ROW-MAJOR-AREF A I)).
-
 63:
   Paul Werkowski wrote on cmucl-imp@cons.org 2000-11-15
     I am looking into this problem that showed up on the cmucl-help
@@ -944,6 +916,11 @@ WORKAROUND:
 
      (see bug 203)
 
+  c. (defun foo (x y)
+       (locally (declare (type fixnum x y))
+         (+ x (* 2 y))))
+     (foo 1.1 2) => 5.1
+
 194: "no error from (THE REAL '(1 2 3)) in some cases"
   fixed parts:
     a. In sbcl-0.7.7.9,