your pre-0.7.0 state of grace with
#+sbcl (declaim (notinline find position find-if position-if)) ; bug 117..
+118:
+ as reported by Eric Marsden on cmucl-imp@cons.org 2001-08-14:
+ (= (FLOAT 1 DOUBLE-FLOAT-EPSILON)
+ (+ (FLOAT 1 DOUBLE-FLOAT-EPSILON) DOUBLE-FLOAT-EPSILON)) => T
+ when of course it should be NIL. (He says it only fails for X86,
+ not SPARC; dunno about Alpha.)
+
+ Also, "the same problem exists for LONG-FLOAT-EPSILON,
+ DOUBLE-FLOAT-NEGATIVE-EPSILON, LONG-FLOAT-NEGATIVE-EPSILON (though
+ for the -negative- the + is replaced by a - in the test)."
+
+ Raymond Toy comments that this is tricky on the X86 since its FPU
+ uses 80-bit precision internally.
+
+
KNOWN BUGS RELATED TO THE IR1 INTERPRETER
(Note: At some point, the pure interpreter (actually a semi-pure
;;; structure for each object file which contains code referring to
;;; the value, plus perhaps one more copy bound to the SYMBOL-VALUE of
;;; the constant. If you don't want that to happen, you should
-;;; probably use DEFPARAMETER instead.
+;;; probably use DEFPARAMETER instead; or if you truly desperately
+;;; need to avoid runtime indirection through a symbol, you might be
+;;; able to do something with LOAD-TIME-VALUE or MAKE-LOAD-FORM.
(defmacro defconstant-eqx (symbol expr eqx &optional doc)
- (let ((expr-tmp (gensym "EXPR-TMP-")))
- `(progn
- ;; When we're building the cross-compiler, and in most
- ;; situations even when we're running the cross-compiler,
- ;; all we need is a nice portable definition in terms of the
- ;; ANSI Common Lisp operations.
- (eval-when (:compile-toplevel :load-toplevel :execute)
- (let ((,expr-tmp ,expr))
- (cond ((boundp ',symbol)
- (unless (and (constantp ',symbol)
- (funcall ,eqx
- (symbol-value ',symbol)
- ,expr-tmp))
- (error "already bound differently: ~S")))
- (t
- (defconstant ,symbol
- ;; KLUDGE: This is a very ugly hack, to be able to
- ;; build SBCL with CMU CL (2.4.19), because there
- ;; seems to be some confusion in CMU CL about
- ;; ,EXPR-TEMP at EVAL-WHEN time ... -- MNA 2000-02-23
- #-cmu ,expr-tmp
- #+cmu ,expr
- ,@(when doc `(,doc)))))))
- ;; The #+SB-XC :COMPILE-TOPLEVEL situation is special, since we
- ;; want to define the symbol not just in the cross-compilation
- ;; host Lisp (which was handled above) but also in the
- ;; cross-compiler (which we will handle now).
- ;;
- ;; KLUDGE: It would probably be possible to do this fairly
- ;; cleanly, in a way parallel to the code above, if we had
- ;; SB!XC:FOO versions of all the primitives CL:FOO used above
- ;; (e.g. SB!XC:BOUNDP, SB!XC:SYMBOL-VALUE, and
- ;; SB!XC:DEFCONSTANT), and took care to call them. But right
- ;; now we just hack around in the guts of the cross-compiler
- ;; instead. -- WHN 2000-11-03
- #+sb-xc
- (eval-when (:compile-toplevel)
- (let ((,expr-tmp ,symbol))
- (unless (and (eql (info :variable :kind ',symbol) :constant)
- (funcall ,eqx
- (info :variable :constant-value ',symbol)
- ,expr-tmp))
- (sb!c::%defconstant ',symbol ,expr-tmp ,doc)))))))
+ `(defconstant ,symbol
+ (%defconstant-eqx-value ',symbol ,expr ,eqx)
+ ,@(when doc (list doc))))
+(defun %defconstant-eqx-value (symbol expr eqx)
+ (flet ((bummer (explanation)
+ (error "~@<bad DEFCONSTANT-EQX ~S: ~2I~_~A~:>" symbol explanation)))
+ (cond ((not (boundp symbol))
+ expr)
+ ((not (constantp symbol))
+ (bummer "already bound as a non-constant"))
+ ((not (funcall eqx (symbol-value symbol) expr))
+ (bummer "already bound as a different constant value"))
+ (t
+ (symbol-value symbol)))))
(error "can't use CLISP -- no (FUNCTION (SETF SYMBOL-FUNCTION))")
)
-;;; CMU CL, at least as of 18b, doesn't support PRINT-OBJECT. In particular, it
-;;; refuses to compile :PRINT-OBJECT options to DEFSTRUCT, so we need to
-;;; conditionalize such options on the :NO-ANSI-PRINT-OBJECT feature in order
-;;; to get the code to compile. (It also fails to do anything useful with
-;;; DEFMETHOD PRINT-OBJECT, but that doesn't matter much, since it doesn't stop
-;;; the cross-compiler from working.)
-;;;
-;;; FIXME: SBCL 0.5.0 doesn't support PRINT-OBJECT either. SBCL 0.6.0 will,
-;;; at which time this conditional should go away.
+;;; CMU CL, at least as of 18b, doesn't support PRINT-OBJECT. In
+;;; particular, it refuses to compile :PRINT-OBJECT options to
+;;; DEFSTRUCT, so we need to conditionalize such options on the
+;;; :NO-ANSI-PRINT-OBJECT feature in order to get the code to compile.
+;;; (It also fails to do anything useful with DEFMETHOD PRINT-OBJECT,
+;;; but that doesn't matter much, since it doesn't stop the
+;;; cross-compiler from working.)
#+cmu
(progn
(warn "CMU CL doesn't support the :PRINT-OBJECT option to DEFSTRUCT.~%")
;;; /(READ-SEQUENCE *BUFFER* S :START 0 :END 3000)=3000
;;; /(READ-SEQUENCE *BUFFER* S :START 0 :END 15000)=1096
;;; /(READ-SEQUENCE *BUFFER* S :START 0 :END 15000)=0
-#+cmu ; FIXME: Remove SBCL once we've patched READ-SEQUENCE.
+#+cmu
(progn
(warn "CMU CL has a broken implementation of READ-SEQUENCE.")
(pushnew :no-ansi-read-sequence *features*))
-;;; Do the exports of COMMON-LISP conform to the standard? If not, try to make
-;;; them conform. (Of course, ANSI says that bashing symbols in the COMMON-LISP
-;;; package like this is undefined, but then if the host Common Lisp were ANSI,
-;;; we wouldn't be doing this, now would we? "One dirty unportable hack
-;;; deserves another.":-)
+;;; Do the exports of COMMON-LISP conform to the standard? If not, try
+;;; to make them conform. (Of course, ANSI says that bashing symbols
+;;; in the COMMON-LISP package like this is undefined, but then if the
+;;; host Common Lisp were ANSI, we wouldn't be doing this, now would
+;;; we? "One dirty unportable hack deserves another.":-)
(let ((standard-ht (make-hash-table :test 'equal))
(host-ht (make-hash-table :test 'equal))
(cl (find-package "COMMON-LISP")))
;;; four numeric fields, is used for versions which aren't released
;;; but correspond only to CVS tags or snapshots.
-"0.pre7.11"
+"0.pre7.12"
projects / sbcl.git / commitdiff