X-Git-Url: http://repo.macrolet.net/gitweb/?a=blobdiff_plain;ds=sidebyside;f=tests%2Fclos.impure.lisp;h=d3a76aa166f4740897b92f7a59b497805720a07b;hb=96b310113978665980a8d65ad5dd83deab05c28b;hp=9d43e31eb19ab3ddfc035ff3b6d6d4829170f587;hpb=ec6d4bd97d9adc6f4003747d8ca92fad7766ccfd;p=sbcl.git

diff --git a/tests/clos.impure.lisp b/tests/clos.impure.lisp
index 9d43e31..d3a76aa 100644
--- a/tests/clos.impure.lisp
+++ b/tests/clos.impure.lisp
@@ -22,7 +22,7 @@
 (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)))
@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@
 
 ;;; Compiling DEFGENERIC should prevent "undefined function" style
 ;;; warnings from code within the same file.
-(defgeneric gf-defined-in-this-file ((x number) (y number)))
+(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)))
@@ -61,22 +61,73 @@
       (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 &key y &rest z))
-
+(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)
@@ -115,6 +166,133 @@
 (defgeneric born-to-be-redefined (x))
 (assert (eq (born-to-be-redefined 1) 'int))
 
+;;; 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)))
+
+;;; 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)))
+
+;;; 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*))
+
+;;; 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)
+
+;;; 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)))))
+
 ;;;; success
 
 (sb-ext:quit :unix-status 104)