X-Git-Url: http://repo.macrolet.net/gitweb/?a=blobdiff_plain;f=tests%2Fclos.impure.lisp;h=1e705908039c34a6aad313334b7e4b3d2e9e3b64;hb=3bbbfec26f90bc005c2ff5c8de0ceb0f95f1a52b;hp=b1dd8c7392eac7ca305b863d39e79a9eadcbf8c7;hpb=138ba28006d97560d270d8da3cf3c99012e9053d;p=sbcl.git diff --git a/tests/clos.impure.lisp b/tests/clos.impure.lisp index b1dd8c7..1e70590 100644 --- a/tests/clos.impure.lisp +++ b/tests/clos.impure.lisp @@ -115,7 +115,7 @@ (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 +;;; 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), @@ -130,7 +130,6 @@ ((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 @@ -139,6 +138,79 @@ (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 t)) + (: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*)) ;;;; success