X-Git-Url: http://repo.macrolet.net/gitweb/?a=blobdiff_plain;f=tests%2Ftype.impure.lisp;h=da143e3828af0c4289d608716c9a8951eafae2b1;hb=25e76ec2b1083ac6a4bba42af7ad7b5a8239f2b8;hp=4b423bb0d5400c31116f10a2a8474a286e7877e3;hpb=44e8b1e878153bd815021acd962806a3e7e86c60;p=sbcl.git diff --git a/tests/type.impure.lisp b/tests/type.impure.lisp index 4b423bb..da143e3 100644 --- a/tests/type.impure.lisp +++ b/tests/type.impure.lisp @@ -1,6 +1,16 @@ -(in-package :cl-user) +;;;; This software is part of the SBCL system. See the README file for +;;;; more information. +;;;; +;;;; While most of SBCL is derived from the CMU CL system, the test +;;;; files (like this one) were written from scratch after the fork +;;;; from CMU CL. +;;;; +;;;; This software is in the public domain and is provided with +;;;; absolutely no warranty. See the COPYING and CREDITS files for +;;;; more information. (load "assertoid.lisp") +(use-package "ASSERTOID") (defmacro assert-nil-nil (expr) `(assert (equal '(nil nil) (multiple-value-list ,expr)))) @@ -9,16 +19,21 @@ (defmacro assert-t-t (expr) `(assert (equal '(t t) (multiple-value-list ,expr)))) +(defmacro assert-t-t-or-uncertain (expr) + `(assert (let ((list (multiple-value-list ,expr))) + (or (equal '(nil nil) list) + (equal '(t t) list))))) + (let ((types '(character integer fixnum (integer 0 10) single-float (single-float -1.0 1.0) (single-float 0.1) (real 4 8) (real -1 7) (real 2 11) + null symbol keyword (member #\a #\b #\c) (member 1 #\a) (member 3.0 3.3) - ;; FIXME: When bug 91 is fixed, add these to the list: - ;; (INTEGER -1 1) - ;; UNSIGNED-BYTE - ;; (RATIONAL -1 7) (RATIONAL -2 4) - ;; RATIO + (integer -1 1) + unsigned-byte + (rational -1 7) (rational -2 4) + ratio ))) (dolist (i types) (format t "type I=~S~%" i) @@ -75,14 +90,10 @@ ;;; part I: TYPEP (assert (typep #(11) '(simple-array t 1))) (assert (typep #(11) '(simple-array (or integer symbol) 1))) -;;; FIXME: This is broken because of compiler bug 123: the compiler -;;; optimizes the type test to T, so it never gets a chance to raise a -;;; runtime error. (It used to work under the IR1 interpreter just -;;; because the IR1 interpreter doesn't try to optimize TYPEP as hard -;;; as the byte compiler does.) -#+nil (assert (raises-error? (typep #(11) '(simple-array undef-type 1)))) +(assert (raises-error? (typep #(11) '(simple-array undef-type 1)))) (assert (not (typep 11 '(simple-array undef-type 1)))) ;;; part II: SUBTYPEP + (assert (subtypep '(vector some-undef-type) 'vector)) (assert (not (subtypep '(vector some-undef-type) 'integer))) (assert-nil-nil (subtypep 'utype-1 'utype-2)) @@ -91,7 +102,7 @@ (assert-nil-nil (subtypep '(vector t) '(vector utype-2))) ;;; ANSI specifically disallows bare AND and OR symbols as type specs. -#| ; Alas, this is part of bug 10, still unfixed as of sbcl-0.6.11.10. +#| ; Alas, this is part of bug 10, still unfixed as of sbcl-0.7.2. (assert (raises-error? (typep 11 'and))) (assert (raises-error? (typep 11 'or))) |# @@ -117,30 +128,71 @@ (assert-nil-t (subtypep '(not float) 'single-float)) (assert-t-t (subtypep '(not atom) 'cons)) (assert-t-t (subtypep 'cons '(not atom))) -;;; FIXME: Another thing to revisit is %INVOKE-TYPE-METHOD. -;;; Essentially, the problem is that when the two arguments to -;;; subtypep are of different specifier-type types (e.g. HAIRY and -;;; UNION), there are two applicable type methods -- in this case +;;; ANSI requires that SUBTYPEP relationships among built-in primitive +;;; types never be uncertain, i.e. never return NIL as second value. +;;; Prior to about sbcl-0.7.2.6, ATOM caused a lot of problems here +;;; (because it's a negation type, implemented as a HAIRY-TYPE, and +;;; CMU CL's HAIRY-TYPE logic punted a lot). +(assert-t-t (subtypep 'integer 'atom)) +(assert-t-t (subtypep 'function 'atom)) +(assert-nil-t (subtypep 'list 'atom)) +(assert-nil-t (subtypep 'atom 'integer)) +(assert-nil-t (subtypep 'atom 'function)) +(assert-nil-t (subtypep 'atom 'list)) +;;; ATOM is equivalent to (NOT CONS): +(assert-t-t (subtypep 'integer '(not cons))) +(assert-nil-t (subtypep 'list '(not cons))) +(assert-nil-t (subtypep '(not cons) 'integer)) +(assert-nil-t (subtypep '(not cons) 'list)) +;;; And we'd better check that all the named types are right. (We also +;;; do some more tests on ATOM here, since once CSR experimented with +;;; making it a named type.) +(assert-t-t (subtypep 'nil 'nil)) +(assert-t-t (subtypep 'nil 'atom)) +(assert-t-t (subtypep 'nil 't)) +(assert-nil-t (subtypep 'atom 'nil)) +(assert-t-t (subtypep 'atom 'atom)) +(assert-t-t (subtypep 'atom 't)) +(assert-nil-t (subtypep 't 'nil)) +(assert-nil-t (subtypep 't 'atom)) +(assert-t-t (subtypep 't 't)) +;;; Also, LIST is now somewhat special, in that (NOT LIST) should be +;;; recognized as a subtype of ATOM: +(assert-t-t (subtypep '(not list) 'atom)) +(assert-nil-t (subtypep 'atom '(not list))) +;;; These used to fail, because when the two arguments to subtypep are +;;; of different specifier-type types (e.g. HAIRY and UNION), there +;;; are two applicable type methods -- in this case ;;; HAIRY-COMPLEX-SUBTYPEP-ARG1-TYPE-METHOD and -;;; UNION-COMPLEX-SUBTYPEP-ARG2-TYPE-METHOD. Both of these exist, but +;;; UNION-COMPLEX-SUBTYPEP-ARG2-TYPE-METHOD. Both of these exist, but ;;; [!%]INVOKE-TYPE-METHOD aren't smart enough to know that if one of ;;; them returns NIL, NIL (indicating uncertainty) it should try the -;;; other; this is complicated by the presence of other TYPE-METHODS -;;; (e.g. INTERSECTION and UNION) whose return convention may or may -;;; not follow the same standard. -#|| +;;; other. However, as of sbcl-0.7.2.6 or so, CALL-NEXT-METHOD-ish +;;; logic in those type methods fixed it. (assert-nil-t (subtypep '(not cons) 'list)) (assert-nil-t (subtypep '(not single-float) 'float)) -||# -;;; If we fix the above FIXME, we should for free have fixed bug 58. -#|| +;;; Somewhere along the line (probably when adding CALL-NEXT-METHOD-ish +;;; logic in SUBTYPEP type methods) we fixed bug 58 too: (assert-t-t (subtypep '(and zilch integer) 'zilch)) -||# +(assert-t-t (subtypep '(and integer zilch) 'zilch)) + ;;; Bug 84: SB-KERNEL:CSUBTYPEP was a bit enthusiastic at ;;; special-casing calls to subtypep involving *EMPTY-TYPE*, ;;; corresponding to the NIL type-specifier; we were bogusly returning ;;; NIL, T (indicating surety) for the following: (assert-nil-nil (subtypep '(satisfies some-undefined-fun) 'nil)) + +;;; It turns out that, as of sbcl-0.7.2, we require to be able to +;;; detect this to compile src/compiler/node.lisp (and in particular, +;;; the definition of the component structure). Since it's a sensible +;;; thing to want anyway, let's test for it here: +(assert-t-t (subtypep '(or some-undefined-type (member :no-ir2-yet :dead)) + '(or some-undefined-type (member :no-ir2-yet :dead)))) +;;; BUG 158 (failure to compile loops with vector references and +;;; increments of greater than 1) was a symptom of type system +;;; uncertainty, to wit: +(assert-t-t (subtypep '(and (mod 536870911) (or (integer 0 0) (integer 2 536870912))) + '(mod 536870911))) ; aka SB-INT:INDEX. ;;;; Douglas Thomas Crosher rewrote the CMU CL type test system to ;;;; allow inline type tests for CONDITIONs and STANDARD-OBJECTs, and @@ -296,6 +348,25 @@ #.*tests-of-inline-type-tests*) (tests-of-inline-type-tests) (format t "~&/done with compiled (TESTS-OF-INLINE-TYPE-TESTS)~%") - + +;;; Redefinition of classes should alter the type hierarchy (BUG 140): +(defclass superclass () ()) +(defclass maybe-subclass () ()) +(assert-nil-t (subtypep 'maybe-subclass 'superclass)) +(defclass maybe-subclass (superclass) ()) +(assert-t-t (subtypep 'maybe-subclass 'superclass)) +(defclass maybe-subclass () ()) +(assert-nil-t (subtypep 'maybe-subclass 'superclass)) + +;;; Prior to sbcl-0.7.6.27, there was some confusion in ARRAY types +;;; specialized on some as-yet-undefined type which would cause this +;;; program to fail (bugs #123 and #165). Verify that it doesn't. +(defun foo (x) + (declare (type (vector bar) x)) + (aref x 1)) +(deftype bar () 'single-float) +(assert (eql (foo (make-array 3 :element-type 'bar :initial-element 0.0f0)) + 0.0f0)) + ;;; success (quit :unix-status 104)