[ansi-test-devel] Does this work at all?

[Erik Huelsmann]

As you'll understand, the mail wasn't finished and prematurely sent.

On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 8:23 PM, Erik Huelsmann <ehuels at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Juan,
>
>>> > If you guys are too busy, could I get some kind of write access to the
>>> > repository? My user in common-lisp.net is jgarcia, but if the answer is
>>> > positive I would also need some hints about the developer's access to svn
>>> > repositories in common-lisp.net
>>>
>>> Erik (Huelsmann, the abcl maintainer) can grant write access.
>
>> I would appreciate it. I believe that all maintainers of Common Lisp
>> implementations should be granted such access
>
> Done. I have offered access to most maintainers. Not all of them
> wanted it or saw use centralize maintenance of 'their copy'

of the ansi test suite.

Any implementer is welcome on this list, project and repository. Let
that be another invitation to anybody who's watching this thread and
has always felt left out.

Also, anybody who is Common Lisp Savvy (quite a bit) and wants to
extend the test suite is welcome.


>>> If you have doubts about the sanity of some particular test, I
>>> recommend consulting the irc
>>
>> I do not have doubts about the sanity of such a test. I strongly believe it
>> is wrong, which is why I opened the discussion here to change or remove it.
>> I do not believe that an IRC channel should be a substitute for discussion
>> of a project, because I am not seeking _help_ or information. I write here
>> as a maintainer of an implementation seeking consensus about a test that
>> affects all implementations, that is all.

As Ville pointed out, many CL savvy people are on that channel. But
among the CL savvy people there, there are also a number of
maintainers of other implementatiions. SBCL, CMUCL, ABCL and Allegro
come to mind. So, if there's no immediate reaction here, you
definitely could try in the IRC channel.

 Personally, I think the test really tests what it wants to and as
Ville points out, ABCL has had a problem in the past with one of the
(C)TYPECASE tests. I'm glad it was there. Given Ville's explanation of
what the test is testing (regardless that it does so with code that
can't be executed to completion succesfully), do you have a proposal
to replace it with?

I think it would be a pitty to start removing tests from the testsuite
without replacing those tests with acceptable variants: we'd run the
risk of eroding the test suite which for many implementers is a
valuable sanity check.


Regards,

Erik.