(:use "CL"))
(in-package "FOO")
\f
-;;;; It should be possible to do DEFGENERIC and DEFMETHOD referring to
-;;;; structure types defined earlier in the file.
+;;; It should be possible to do DEFGENERIC and DEFMETHOD referring to
+;;; structure types defined earlier in the file.
(defstruct struct-a x y)
(defstruct struct-b x y z)
(defmethod wiggle ((a struct-a))
(+ (struct-a-x a)
(struct-a-y a)))
-(defgeneric jiggle ((arg t)))
+(defgeneric jiggle (arg))
(defmethod jiggle ((a struct-a))
(- (struct-a-x a)
(struct-a-y a)))
(assert (= (wiggle (make-struct-a :x 6 :y 5))
(jiggle (make-struct-b :x 19 :y 6 :z 2))))
-;;; Compiling DEFGENERIC should prevent "undefined function" style warnings
-;;; from code within the same file.
-(defgeneric gf-defined-in-this-file ((x number) (y number)))
+;;; Compiling DEFGENERIC should prevent "undefined function" style
+;;; warnings from code within the same file.
+(defgeneric gf-defined-in-this-file (x y))
(defun function-using-gf-defined-in-this-file (x y n)
(unless (minusp n)
(gf-defined-in-this-file x y)))
(defmethod no-applicable-method ((zut-n-a-m (eql #'zut-n-a-m)) &rest args)
(format t "~&No applicable method for ZUT-N-A-M ~S, yet.~%" args))
(zut-n-a-m 1 2 3)
+
+;;; bug reported and fixed by Alexey Dejneka sbcl-devel 2001-09-10:
+;;; This DEFGENERIC shouldn't cause an error.
+(defgeneric ad-gf (a) (:method :around (x) x))
+
+;;; DEFGENERIC and DEFMETHOD shouldn't accept &REST when it's not
+;;; followed by a variable:
+;;; e.g. (DEFMETHOD FOO ((X T) &REST) NIL) should signal an error.
+(eval-when (:load-toplevel :compile-toplevel :execute)
+ (defmacro expect-error (&body body)
+ `(multiple-value-bind (res condition)
+ (ignore-errors (progn ,@body))
+ (declare (ignore res))
+ (typep condition 'error))))
+(assert (expect-error
+ (macroexpand-1
+ '(defmethod foo0 ((x t) &rest) nil))))
+(assert (expect-error (defgeneric foo1 (x &rest))))
+(assert (expect-error (defgeneric foo2 (x a &rest))))
+(defgeneric foo3 (x &rest y))
+(defmethod foo3 ((x t) &rest y) nil)
+(defmethod foo4 ((x t) &key y &rest z) nil)
+(defgeneric foo4 (x &rest z &key y))
+(assert (expect-error (defgeneric foo5 (x &rest))))
+(assert (expect-error (macroexpand-1 '(defmethod foo6 (x &rest)))))
+
+;;; more lambda-list checking
+;;;
+;;; DEFGENERIC lambda lists are subject to various limitations, as per
+;;; section 3.4.2 of the ANSI spec. Since Alexey Dejneka's patch for
+;;; bug 191-b ca. sbcl-0.7.22, these limitations should be enforced.
+(labels ((coerce-to-boolean (x)
+ (if x t nil))
+ (%like-or-dislike (expr expected-failure-p)
+ (declare (type boolean expected-failure-p))
+ (format t "~&trying ~S~%" expr)
+ (multiple-value-bind (fun warnings-p failure-p)
+ (compile nil
+ `(lambda ()
+ ,expr))
+ (declare (ignore fun))
+ ;; In principle the constraint on WARNINGS-P below seems
+ ;; reasonable, but in practice we get warnings about
+ ;; undefined functions from the DEFGENERICs, apparently
+ ;; because the DECLAIMs which ordinarily prevent such
+ ;; warnings don't take effect because EVAL-WHEN
+ ;; (:COMPILE-TOPLEVEL) loses its magic when compiled
+ ;; within a LAMBDA. So maybe we can't test WARNINGS-P
+ ;; after all?
+ ;;(unless expected-failure-p
+ ;; (assert (not warnings-p)))
+ (assert (eq (coerce-to-boolean failure-p) expected-failure-p))))
+ (like (expr)
+ (%like-or-dislike expr nil))
+ (dislike (expr)
+ (%like-or-dislike expr t)))
+ ;; basic sanity
+ (dislike '(defgeneric gf-for-ll-test-0 ("a" #p"b")))
+ (like '(defgeneric gf-for-ll-test-1 ()))
+ (like '(defgeneric gf-for-ll-test-2 (x)))
+ ;; forbidden default or supplied-p for &OPTIONAL or &KEY arguments
+ (dislike '(defgeneric gf-for-ll-test-3 (x &optional (y 0))))
+ (like '(defgeneric gf-for-ll-test-4 (x &optional y)))
+ (dislike '(defgeneric gf-for-ll-test-5 (x y &key (z :z z-p))))
+ (like '(defgeneric gf-for-ll-test-6 (x y &key z)))
+ (dislike '(defgeneric gf-for-ll-test-7 (x &optional (y 0) &key z)))
+ (like '(defgeneric gf-for-ll-test-8 (x &optional y &key z)))
+ (dislike '(defgeneric gf-for-ll-test-9 (x &optional y &key (z :z))))
+ (like '(defgeneric gf-for-ll-test-10 (x &optional y &key z)))
+ (dislike '(defgeneric gf-for-ll-test-11 (&optional &key (k :k k-p))))
+ (like '(defgeneric gf-for-ll-test-12 (&optional &key k)))
+ ;; forbidden &AUX
+ (dislike '(defgeneric gf-for-ll-test-13 (x y z &optional a &aux g h)))
+ (like '(defgeneric gf-for-ll-test-14 (x y z &optional a)))
+ (dislike '(defgeneric gf-for-ll-test-bare-aux-1 (x &aux)))
+ (like '(defgeneric gf-for-ll-test-bare-aux-2 (x)))
+ ;; also can't use bogoDEFMETHODish type-qualifier-ish decorations
+ ;; on required arguments
+ (dislike '(defgeneric gf-for-11-test-15 ((arg t))))
+ (like '(defgeneric gf-for-11-test-16 (arg))))
+
+;;; structure-class tests setup
+(defclass structure-class-foo1 () () (:metaclass cl:structure-class))
+(defclass structure-class-foo2 (structure-class-foo1)
+ () (:metaclass cl:structure-class))
+
+;;; standard-class tests setup
+(defclass standard-class-foo1 () () (:metaclass cl:standard-class))
+(defclass standard-class-foo2 (standard-class-foo1)
+ () (:metaclass cl:standard-class))
+
+(assert (typep (class-of (make-instance 'structure-class-foo1))
+ 'structure-class))
+(assert (typep (make-instance 'structure-class-foo1) 'structure-class-foo1))
+(assert (typep (make-instance 'standard-class-foo1) 'standard-class-foo1))
+
+;;; DEFGENERIC's blow-away-old-methods behavior is specified to have
+;;; special hacks to distinguish between defined-with-DEFGENERIC-:METHOD
+;;; methods and defined-with-DEFMETHOD methods, so that reLOADing
+;;; DEFGENERIC-containing files does the right thing instead of
+;;; randomly slicing your generic functions. (APD made this work
+;;; in sbcl-0.7.0.2.)
+(defgeneric born-to-be-redefined (x)
+ (:method ((x integer))
+ 'integer))
+(defmethod born-to-be-redefined ((x real))
+ 'real)
+(assert (eq (born-to-be-redefined 1) 'integer))
+(defgeneric born-to-be-redefined (x))
+(assert (eq (born-to-be-redefined 1) 'real)) ; failed until sbcl-0.7.0.2
+(defgeneric born-to-be-redefined (x)
+ (:method ((x integer))
+ 'integer))
+(defmethod born-to-be-redefined ((x integer))
+ 'int)
+(assert (eq (born-to-be-redefined 1) 'int))
+(defgeneric born-to-be-redefined (x))
+(assert (eq (born-to-be-redefined 1) 'int))
+\f
+;;; In the removal of ITERATE from SB-PCL, a bug was introduced
+;;; preventing forward-references and also change-class (which
+;;; forward-references used interally) from working properly. One
+;;; symptom was reported by Brian Spilsbury (sbcl-devel 2002-04-08),
+;;; and another on IRC by Dan Barlow simultaneously. Better check
+;;; that it doesn't happen again.
+;;;
+;;; First, the forward references:
+(defclass a (b) ())
+(defclass b () ())
+;;; Then change-class
+(defclass class-with-slots ()
+ ((a-slot :initarg :a-slot :accessor a-slot)
+ (b-slot :initarg :b-slot :accessor b-slot)
+ (c-slot :initarg :c-slot :accessor c-slot)))
+(let ((foo (make-instance 'class-with-slots
+ :a-slot 1
+ :b-slot 2
+ :c-slot 3)))
+ (let ((bar (change-class foo 'class-with-slots)))
+ (assert (= (a-slot bar) 1))
+ (assert (= (b-slot bar) 2))
+ (assert (= (c-slot bar) 3))))
+
+;;; some more CHANGE-CLASS testing, now that we have an ANSI-compliant
+;;; version (thanks to Espen Johnsen)
+(defclass from-class ()
+ ((foo :initarg :foo :accessor foo)))
+(defclass to-class ()
+ ((foo :initarg :foo :accessor foo)
+ (bar :initarg :bar :accessor bar)))
+(let* ((from (make-instance 'from-class :foo 1))
+ (to (change-class from 'to-class :bar 2)))
+ (assert (= (foo to) 1))
+ (assert (= (bar to) 2)))
+
+;;; Until Pierre Mai's patch (sbcl-devel 2002-06-18, merged in
+;;; sbcl-0.7.4.39) the :MOST-SPECIFIC-LAST option had no effect.
+(defgeneric bug180 (x)
+ (:method-combination list :most-specific-last))
+(defmethod bug180 list ((x number))
+ 'number)
+(defmethod bug180 list ((x fixnum))
+ 'fixnum)
+(assert (equal (bug180 14) '(number fixnum)))
+\f
+;;; printing a structure class should not loop indefinitely (or cause
+;;; a stack overflow):
+(defclass test-printing-structure-class ()
+ ((slot :initarg :slot))
+ (:metaclass structure-class))
+(print (make-instance 'test-printing-structure-class :slot 2))
+
+;;; structure-classes should behave nicely when subclassed
+(defclass super-structure ()
+ ((a :initarg :a :accessor a-accessor)
+ (b :initform 2 :reader b-reader))
+ (:metaclass structure-class))
+(defclass sub-structure (super-structure)
+ ((c :initarg :c :writer c-writer :accessor c-accessor))
+ (:metaclass structure-class))
+(let ((foo (make-instance 'sub-structure :a 1 :c 3)))
+ (assert (= (a-accessor foo) 1))
+ (assert (= (b-reader foo) 2))
+ (assert (= (c-accessor foo) 3))
+ (setf (a-accessor foo) 4)
+ (c-writer 5 foo)
+ (assert (= (a-accessor foo) 4))
+ (assert (= (c-accessor foo) 5)))
+\f
+;;; At least as of sbcl-0.7.4, PCL has code to support a special
+;;; encoding of effective method functions for slot accessors as
+;;; FIXNUMs. Given this special casing, it'd be easy for slot accessor
+;;; functions to get broken in special ways even though ordinary
+;;; generic functions work. As of sbcl-0.7.4 we didn't have any tests
+;;; for that possibility. Now we have a few tests:
+(defclass fish ()
+ ((fin :reader ffin :writer ffin!)
+ (tail :reader ftail :writer ftail!)))
+(defvar *fish* (make-instance 'fish))
+(ffin! 'triangular-fin *fish*)
+(defclass cod (fish) ())
+(defvar *cod* (make-instance 'cod))
+(defparameter *clos-dispatch-side-fx* (make-array 0 :fill-pointer 0))
+(defmethod ffin! (new-fin (cod cod))
+ (format t "~&about to set ~S fin to ~S~%" cod new-fin)
+ (vector-push-extend '(cod) *clos-dispatch-side-fx*)
+ (prog1
+ (call-next-method)
+ (format t "~&done setting ~S fin to ~S~%" cod new-fin)))
+(defmethod ffin! :before (new-fin (cod cod))
+ (vector-push-extend '(:before cod) *clos-dispatch-side-fx*)
+ (format t "~&exploring the CLOS dispatch zoo with COD fins~%"))
+(ffin! 'almost-triang-fin *cod*)
+(assert (eq (ffin *cod*) 'almost-triang-fin))
+(assert (equalp #((:before cod) (cod)) *clos-dispatch-side-fx*))
+\f
+;;; Until sbcl-0.7.6.21, the long form of DEFINE-METHOD-COMBINATION
+;;; ignored its options; Gerd Moellmann found and fixed the problem
+;;; for cmucl (cmucl-imp 2002-06-18).
+(define-method-combination test-mc (x)
+ ;; X above being a method-group-specifier
+ ((primary () :required t))
+ `(call-method ,(first primary)))
+
+(defgeneric gf (obj)
+ (:method-combination test-mc 1))
+
+(defmethod gf (obj)
+ obj)
+\f
+;;; Until sbcl-0.7.7.20, some conditions weren't being signalled, and
+;;; some others were of the wrong type:
+(macrolet ((assert-program-error (form)
+ `(multiple-value-bind (value error)
+ (ignore-errors ,form)
+ (assert (null value))
+ (assert (typep error 'program-error)))))
+ (assert-program-error (defclass foo001 () (a b a)))
+ (assert-program-error (defclass foo002 ()
+ (a b)
+ (:default-initargs x 'a x 'b)))
+ (assert-program-error (defclass foo003 ()
+ ((a :allocation :class :allocation :class))))
+ (assert-program-error (defclass foo004 ()
+ ((a :silly t))))
+ ;; and some more, found by Wolfhard Buss and fixed for cmucl by Gerd
+ ;; Moellmann in 0.7.8.x:
+ (assert-program-error (progn
+ (defmethod odd-key-args-checking (&key (key 42)) key)
+ (odd-key-args-checking 3)))
+ (assert (= (odd-key-args-checking) 42))
+ (assert (eq (odd-key-args-checking :key t) t)))
+\f
+;;; DOCUMENTATION's argument-precedence-order wasn't being faithfully
+;;; preserved through the bootstrap process until sbcl-0.7.8.39.
+;;; (thanks to Gerd Moellmann)
+(let ((answer (documentation '+ 'function)))
+ (assert (stringp answer))
+ (defmethod documentation ((x (eql '+)) y) "WRONG")
+ (assert (string= (documentation '+ 'function) answer)))
+\f
+;;; only certain declarations are permitted in DEFGENERIC
+(macrolet ((assert-program-error (form)
+ `(multiple-value-bind (value error)
+ (ignore-errors ,form)
+ (assert (null value))
+ (assert (typep error 'program-error)))))
+ (assert-program-error (defgeneric bogus-declaration (x)
+ (declare (special y))))
+ (assert-program-error (defgeneric bogus-declaration2 (x)
+ (declare (notinline concatenate)))))
+;;; CALL-NEXT-METHOD should call NO-NEXT-METHOD if there is no next
+;;; method.
+(defmethod no-next-method-test ((x integer)) (call-next-method))
+(assert (null (ignore-errors (no-next-method-test 1))))
+(defmethod no-next-method ((g (eql #'no-next-method-test)) m &rest args)
+ 'success)
+(assert (eq (no-next-method-test 1) 'success))
+(assert (null (ignore-errors (no-next-method-test 'foo))))
+\f
+;;; regression test for bug 176, following a fix that seems
+;;; simultaneously to fix 140 while not exposing 176 (by Gerd
+;;; Moellmann, merged in sbcl-0.7.9.12).
+(dotimes (i 10)
+ (let ((lastname (intern (format nil "C176-~D" (1- i))))
+ (name (intern (format nil "C176-~D" i))))
+ (eval `(defclass ,name
+ (,@(if (= i 0) nil (list lastname)))
+ ()))
+ (eval `(defmethod initialize-instance :after ((x ,name) &rest any)
+ (declare (ignore any))))))
+(defclass b176 () (aslot-176))
+(defclass c176-0 (b176) ())
+(assert (= 1 (setf (slot-value (make-instance 'c176-9) 'aslot-176) 1)))
+\f
+;;; DEFINE-METHOD-COMBINATION was over-eager at checking for duplicate
+;;; primary methods:
+(define-method-combination dmc-test-mc (&optional (order :most-specific-first))
+ ((around (:around))
+ (primary (dmc-test-mc) :order order :required t))
+ (let ((form (if (rest primary)
+ `(and ,@(mapcar #'(lambda (method)
+ `(call-method ,method))
+ primary))
+ `(call-method ,(first primary)))))
+ (if around
+ `(call-method ,(first around)
+ (,@(rest around)
+ (make-method ,form)))
+ form)))
+
+(defgeneric dmc-test-mc (&key k)
+ (:method-combination dmc-test-mc))
+
+(defmethod dmc-test-mc dmc-test-mc (&key k)
+ k)
+
+(dmc-test-mc :k 1)
+;;; While I'm at it, DEFINE-METHOD-COMBINATION is defined to return
+;;; the NAME argument, not some random method object. So:
+(assert (eq (define-method-combination dmc-test-return-foo)
+ 'dmc-test-return-foo))
+(assert (eq (define-method-combination dmc-test-return-bar :operator and)
+ 'dmc-test-return-bar))
+(assert (eq (define-method-combination dmc-test-return
+ (&optional (order :most-specific-first))
+ ((around (:around))
+ (primary (dmc-test-return) :order order :required t))
+ (let ((form (if (rest primary)
+ `(and ,@(mapcar #'(lambda (method)
+ `(call-method ,method))
+ primary))
+ `(call-method ,(first primary)))))
+ (if around
+ `(call-method ,(first around)
+ (,@(rest around)
+ (make-method ,form)))
+ form)))
+ 'dmc-test-return))
+\f
+;;; DEFMETHOD should signal a PROGRAM-ERROR if an incompatible lambda
+;;; list is given:
+(defmethod incompatible-ll-test-1 (x) x)
+(multiple-value-bind (result error)
+ (ignore-errors (defmethod incompatible-ll-test-1 (x y) y))
+ (assert (null result))
+ (assert (typep error 'program-error)))
+(multiple-value-bind (result error)
+ (ignore-errors (defmethod incompatible-ll-test-1 (x &rest y) y))
+ (assert (null result))
+ (assert (typep error 'program-error)))
+;;; Sneakily using a bit of MOPness to check some consistency
+(assert (= (length
+ (sb-pcl:generic-function-methods #'incompatible-ll-test-1)) 1))
+
+(defmethod incompatible-ll-test-2 (x &key bar) bar)
+(multiple-value-bind (result error)
+ (ignore-errors (defmethod incompatible-ll-test-2 (x) x))
+ (assert (null result))
+ (assert (typep error 'program-error)))
+(defmethod incompatible-ll-test-2 (x &rest y) y)
+(assert (= (length
+ (sb-pcl:generic-function-methods #'incompatible-ll-test-2)) 1))
+(defmethod incompatible-ll-test-2 ((x integer) &key bar) bar)
+(assert (= (length
+ (sb-pcl:generic-function-methods #'incompatible-ll-test-2)) 2))
+(assert (equal (incompatible-ll-test-2 t 1 2) '(1 2)))
+(assert (eq (incompatible-ll-test-2 1 :bar 'yes) 'yes))
+\f
+;;; Attempting to instantiate classes with forward references in their
+;;; CPL should signal errors (FIXME: of what type?)
+(defclass never-finished-class (this-one-unfinished-too) ())
+(multiple-value-bind (result error)
+ (ignore-errors (make-instance 'never-finished-class))
+ (assert (null result))
+ (assert (typep error 'error)))
+(multiple-value-bind (result error)
+ (ignore-errors (make-instance 'this-one-unfinished-too))
+ (assert (null result))
+ (assert (typep error 'error)))
+\f
+;;; Classes with :ALLOCATION :CLASS slots should be subclassable (and
+;;; weren't for a while in sbcl-0.7.9.xx)
+(defclass superclass-with-slot ()
+ ((a :allocation :class)))
+(defclass subclass-for-class-allocation (superclass-with-slot) ())
+(make-instance 'subclass-for-class-allocation)
+\f
+;;; bug #136: CALL-NEXT-METHOD was being a little too lexical,
+;;; resulting in failure in the following:
+(defmethod call-next-method-lexical-args ((x integer))
+ x)
+(defmethod call-next-method-lexical-args :around ((x integer))
+ (let ((x (1+ x)))
+ (call-next-method)))
+(assert (= (call-next-method-lexical-args 3) 3))
\f
;;;; success
projects / sbcl.git / blobdiff