0.8.3.51:

[sbcl.git] / BUGS

diff --git a/BUGS b/BUGS
index a20b8ff..eb66e35 100644 (file)
--- a/BUGS
+++ b/BUGS
@@ -501,17 +501,7 @@ WORKAROUND:
   conformance problem, since seems hard to construct useful code
   where it matters.)
 
-  b.
-  * (defun foo (x)
-      (declare (type (double-float -0d0) x))
-      (declare (optimize speed))
-      (+ x (sqrt (log (random 1d0)))))
-  debugger invoked on condition of type SIMPLE-ERROR:
-    bad thing to be a type specifier: ((COMPLEX
-                                        (DOUBLE-FLOAT 0.0d0
-                                                      #.SB-EXT:DOUBLE-FLOAT-POSITIVE-INFINITY))
-                                       #C(0.0d0 #.SB-EXT:DOUBLE-FLOAT-POSITIVE-INFINITY)
-                                       #C(0.0d0 #.SB-EXT:DOUBLE-FLOAT-POSITIVE-INFINITY))
+  b. (fixed in 0.8.3.43)
 
 146:
   Floating point errors are reported poorly. E.g. on x86 OpenBSD
@@ -1072,7 +1062,9 @@ WORKAROUND:
 
 274:
   CLHS says that type declaration of a symbol macro should not affect
-  its expansion, but in SBCL it does.
+  its expansion, but in SBCL it does. (If you like magic and want to
+  fix it, don't forget to change all uses of MACROEXPAND to
+  MACROEXPAND*.)
 
 275:
   The following code (taken from CLOCC) takes a lot of time to compile:
@@ -1091,10 +1083,6 @@ WORKAROUND:
 
   (taken from CLOCC)
 
-277:
-  IGNORE/IGNORABLE declarations should be acceptable for symbol
-  macros.
-
 278:
   a.
     (defun foo ()
@@ -1104,8 +1092,7 @@ WORKAROUND:
 
   uses generic arithmetic.
 
-  b. For the example above, the compiler does not issue a note.
-     (fixed in 0.8.3.6, but a test case would be good)
+  b. (fixed in 0.8.3.6)
 
 279: type propagation error -- correctly inferred type goes astray?
   In sbcl-0.8.3 and sbcl-0.8.1.47, the warning
@@ -1205,3 +1192,21 @@ WORKAROUND:
   There are lots of special variables in SBCL, and I feel sure that at
   least some of them are indicative of potentially thread-unsafe 
   parts of the system.  See doc/internals/notes/threading-specials
+
+286: "recursive known functions"
+  Self-call recognition conflicts with known function
+  recognition. Currently cross compiler and target COMPILE do not
+  recognize recursion, and in target compiler it can be disabled. We
+  can always disable it for known functions with RECURSIVE attribute,
+  but there remains a possibility of a function with a
+  (tail)-recursive simplification pass and transforms/VOPs for base
+  cases.
+
+287: PPC/Linux miscompilation or corruption in first GC
+  When the runtime is compiled with -O3 on certain PPC/Linux machines, a
+  segmentation fault is reported at the point of first triggered GC,
+  during the compilation of DEFSTRUCT WRAPPER.  As a temporary workaround,
+  the runtime is no longer compiled with -O3 on PPC/Linux, but it is likely
+  that this merely obscures, not solves, the underlying problem; as and when
+  underlying problems are fixed, it would be worth trying again to provoke
+  this problem.