need to document exactly what metaobject protocol specification
we're following -- the current code is just inherited from PCL.)
-54:
- The implementation of #'+ returns its single argument without
- type checking, e.g. (+ "illegal") => "illegal".
-
60:
The debugger LIST-LOCATIONS command doesn't work properly.
time trying to GC afterwards. Surely there's some more economical
way to implement (ROOM T).
-115:
- reported by Martin Atzmueller 2001-06-25; originally from CMU CL bugs
- collection:
- (in-package :cl-user)
- ;;; The following invokes a compiler error.
- (declaim (optimize (speed 2) (debug 3)))
- (defun tst ()
- (flet ((m1 ()
- (unwind-protect nil)))
- (if (catch nil)
- (m1)
- (m1))))
- The error message in sbcl-0.6.12.42 is
- internal error, failed AVER:
- "(COMMON-LISP:EQ (SB!C::TN-ENVIRONMENT SB!C:TN) SB!C::TN-ENV)"
-
117:
When the compiler inline expands functions, it may be that different
kinds of return values are generated from different code branches.
Evidently Python thinks of the lambda as a code transformation so
much that it forgets that it's also an object.
-127:
- The DEFSTRUCT section of the ANSI spec, in the :CONC-NAME section,
- specifies a precedence rule for name collisions between slot accessors of
- structure classes related by inheritance. As of 0.7.0, SBCL still
- doesn't follow it.
-
135:
Ideally, uninterning a symbol would allow it, and its associated
FDEFINITION and PROCLAIM data, to be reclaimed by the GC. However,
forever, even when it is uninterned and all other references to it
are lost.
-136:
- (reported by Arnaud Rouanet on cmucl-imp 2001-12-18)
- (defmethod foo ((x integer))
- x)
- (defmethod foo :around ((x integer))
- (let ((x (1+ x)))
- (call-next-method)))
- Now (FOO 3) should return 3, but instead it returns 4.
-
-141:
- Pretty-printing nested backquotes doesn't work right, as
- reported by Alexey Dejneka sbcl-devel 2002-01-13:
- * '``(FOO ,@',@S)
- ``(FOO SB-IMPL::BACKQ-COMMA-AT S)
- * (lisp-implementation-version)
- "0.pre7.129"
+141: "pretty printing and backquote"
+ a.
+ * '``(FOO ,@',@S)
+ ``(FOO SB-IMPL::BACKQ-COMMA-AT S)
+
+ b.
+ * (write '`(, .ala.) :readably t :pretty t)
+ `(,.ALA.)
+
+ (note the space between the comma and the point)
+
143:
(reported by Jesse Bouwman 2001-10-24 through the unfortunately
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.
-178: "AVER failure compiling confused THEs in FUNCALL"
- In sbcl-0.7.4.24, compiling
- (defun bug178 (x)
- (funcall (the function (the standard-object x))))
- gives
- failed AVER:
- "(AND (EQ (IR2-CONTINUATION-PRIMITIVE-TYPE 2CONT) FUNCTION-PTYPE) (EQ CHECK T))"
- This variant compiles OK, though:
- (defun bug178alternative (x)
- (funcall (the nil x)))
-
- (since 0.7.8.9 it does not signal an error; see also bug 199)
-
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
(see bug 203)
-193: "unhelpful CLOS error reporting when the primary method is missing"
- In sbcl-0.7.7, when
- (defmethod foo :before ((x t)) (print x))
- is the only method defined on FOO, the error reporting when e.g.
- (foo 12)
- is relatively unhelpful:
- There is no primary method for the generic function
- #<STANDARD-GENERIC-FUNCTION FOO (1)>.
- with the offending argument nowhere visible in the backtrace. This
- continues even if there *are* primary methods, just not for the
- specified arg type, e.g.
- (defmethod foo ((x character)) (print x))
- (defmethod foo ((x string)) (print x))
- (defmethod foo ((x pathname)) ...)
- In that case it could be very helpful to know what argument value is
- falling through the cracks of the defined primary methods, but the
- error message stays the same (even BACKTRACE doesn't tell you what the
- bad argument value is).
-
194: "no error from (THE REAL '(1 2 3)) in some cases"
fixed parts:
a. In sbcl-0.7.7.9,
returns (1 2 3) instead of signalling an error. This was fixed by
APD's "more strict type checking patch", but although the fixed
code (in sbcl-0.7.7.19) works (signals TYPE-ERROR) interactively,
- it's difficult to write a regression test for it, because
+ it's difficult to write a regression test for it, because
(IGNORE-ERRORS (MULTIPLE-VALUE-PROG1 (PROGN (THE REAL '(1 2 3)))))
still returns (1 2 3).
- still-broken parts:
- b. (IGNORE-ERRORS (MULTIPLE-VALUE-PROG1 (PROGN (THE REAL '(1 2 3)))))
+ still-broken parts:
+ b. (IGNORE-ERRORS (MULTIPLE-VALUE-PROG1 (PROGN (THE REAL '(1 2 3)))))
returns (1 2 3). (As above, this shows up when writing regression
tests for fixed-ness of part a.)
c. Also in sbcl-0.7.7.9, (IGNORE-ERRORS (THE REAL '(1 2 3))) => (1 2 3).
inaccurate transformations.
* Alexey Dejneka pointed out that
(IGNORE-ERRORS (IDENTITY (THE REAL '(1 2 3))))
- works as it should. Also
+ and
(IGNORE-ERRORS (VALUES (THE REAL '(1 2 3))))
- works as it should. Perhaps this is another case of VALUES type
- intersections behaving in non-useful ways?
-
-199: "hairy FUNCTION types confuse the compiler"
- (reported by APD sbcl-devel 2002-09-15)
- (DEFUN MUR (F)
- (EQ NIL (FUNCALL F)))
-
- (DEFUN FOO (F X)
- (DECLARE (TYPE (AND FUNCTION (SATISFIES MUR)) F))
- (FUNCALL F X))
-
- fails to compile, printing
- failed AVER:
- "(AND (EQ (IR2-CONTINUATION-PRIMITIVE-TYPE 2CONT) FUNCTION-PTYPE) (EQ CHECK T))"
-
- APD further reports that this bug is not present in CMUCL.
-
- (this case was fixed in 0.7.8.9; see also bug 178)
+ work as they should.
201: "Incautious type inference from compound CONS types"
(reported by APD sbcl-devel 2002-09-17)
(progn (the real (list 1)) t)
This situation may appear during optimizing away degenerate cases of
- certain functions: see bugs 54, 192b.
+ certain functions: see bug 192b.
205: "environment issues in cross compiler"
(These bugs have no impact on user code, but should be fixed or
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)
29-bit pseudorandom numbers?
208: "package confusion in PCL handling of structure slot handlers"
- In sbcl-0.7.8 compiling and loading
+ In sbcl-0.7.8 compiling and loading
(in-package :cl)
(defstruct foo (slot (error "missing")) :type list :read-only t)
(defmethod print-object ((foo foo) stream) (print nil stream))
; in: LAMBDA NIL
; (FOO :Y 1 :Y 2)
- ;
+ ;
; caught STYLE-WARNING:
; The variable #:G15 is defined but never used.
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#))
+ 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. MAKE-SEQUENCE, COERCE, MERGE and CONCATENATE cannot deal with
- various complicated, though recognizeable, CONS types [e.g.
+ various complicated, though recognizeable, CONS types [e.g.
(CONS * (CONS * NULL))
which according to ANSI should be recognized] (and, in SAFETY 3
code, should return a list of LENGTH 2 or signal an error)
(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
+ 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.
(defun test (x y) (the (values integer) (truncate x y)))
(test 10 4) => 2
-219: "DEFINE-COMPILER-MACRO in non-toplevel contexts evaluated at compile-time"
- In sbcl-0.7.9:
-
- * (defun foo (x)
- (when x
- (define-compiler-macro bar (&whole whole)
- (declare (ignore whole))
- (print "expanding compiler macro")
- 1)))
- FOO
- * (defun baz (x) (bar))
- [ ... ]
- "expanding compiler macro"
- BAZ
- * (baz t)
- 1
-
-220:
+220:
Sbcl 0.7.9 fails to compile
(multiple-value-call #'list
(the integer (helper))
nil)
- Type check for INTEGER is inserted, the result of which serves as
- the first argument of M-V-C, is inserted after evaluation of NIL. So
- arguments of M-V-C are pushed in the wrong order. As a temporary
- workaround type checking was disabled for M-V-Cs in 0.7.9.13. A
- better solution would be to put a check between evaluation of
- arguments, but it could be tricky to check result types of PROG1, IF
- etc.
-
-222: "environment problems in PCL"
- Evaluating
-
- (symbol-macrolet ((x 1))
- (defmethod foo (z)
- (macrolet ((ml (form) `(progn ,form ,x)))
- (ml (print x)))))
-
- causes
-
- debugger invoked on condition of type UNBOUND-VARIABLE:
- The variable X is unbound.
-
-223: "(SETF FDEFINITION) and #' semantics broken for wrappers"
- Although this
- (defun foo (x)
- (print x))
- (defun traced (fn)
- (lambda (&rest rest)
- (format t "~&about to call ~S on ~S~%" fn rest)
- (apply fn rest)
- (format t "~&returned from ~S~%" fn)))
- (setf (fdefinition 'foo)
- (traced #'foo))
- (foo 11)
- does what one would expect, this
- (defun bar (x)
- (print x))
- (let ((bar0 #'bar))
- (setf (fdefinition 'bar)
- (lambda (&rest rest)
- (format t "~&about to enter BAR ~S~%" rest)
- (apply bar0 rest)
- (format t "~&back from BAR~%"))))
- (bar 12)
- recurses endlessly in sbcl-0.7.9.32. (Or it works if #' and
- FDEFINITION are replaced by SYMBOL-FUNCTION.)
+ Type check for INTEGER, the result of which serves as the first
+ argument of M-V-C, is inserted after evaluation of NIL. So arguments
+ of M-V-C are pushed in the wrong order. As a temporary workaround
+ type checking was disabled for M-V-Cs in 0.7.9.13. A better solution
+ would be to put the check between evaluation of arguments, but it
+ could be tricky to check result types of PROG1, IF etc.
+
+228: "function-lambda-expression problems"
+ in sbcl-0.7.9.6x, from the REPL:
+ * (progn (declaim (inline foo)) (defun foo (x) x))
+ FOO
+ * (function-lambda-expression #'foo)
+ (SB-C:LAMBDA-WITH-LEXENV NIL NIL NIL (X) (BLOCK FOO X)), NIL, FOO
+ but this first return value is not suitable for input to FUNCTION or
+ COMPILE, as required by ANSI.
+
+229:
+ (subtypep 'function '(function)) => nil, t.
+
+233:
+ Bug in constraint propagation:
+
+ (defun foo (x)
+ (declare (optimize (speed 2) (safety 3)))
+ (let ((y 0d0))
+ (values
+ (the double-float x)
+ (setq y (+ x 1d0))
+ (setq x 3d0)
+ (quux y (+ y 2d0) (* y 3d0)))))
+ (foo 4) => segmentation violation
+
+ (see usage of CONTINUATION-ASSERTED-TYPE in USE-RESULT-CONSTRAINTS)
+
+234:
+ clocc-ansi-test :EXCEPSIT-LEGACY-1277 fails in sbcl-0.7.10.33
+
+ In sbcl-0.7.10.33 (but not ca. 0.7.10.29),
+ (defclass foo54 () ())
+ (reinitialize-instance (make-instance 'foo54) :dummy 0)
+ does not signal an error. ANSI's definition of REINITIALIZE-INSTANCE
+ says
+ The system-supplied primary method for REINITIALIZE-INSTANCE signals
+ an error if an initarg is supplied that is not declared as valid.
+ and defines what that means in
+ 7.1.2 Declaring the Validity of Initialization Arguments
+ In effect, even though the signature shown for the REINITIALIZE-INSTANCE
+ gf in its ANSI definition page is &ALLOW-OTHER-KEYS, and that might
+ make it look as though anything goes, the gf+methods ensemble is required
+ to have more complicated &KEY-checking behavior than that.
DEFUNCT CATEGORIES OF BUGS
IR1-#:
projects / sbcl.git / blobdiff