cl-test-grid results for svn revision 14755

[Erik Huelsmann]

http://abcl.org/trac/changeset/14756 fixes the cl-cont problems. After
providing enough PermGen memory, I got the other failures to complete
correctly (including stmx, btw) now too.

Could you run the tests again to see if *now* there are new successes? (I'm
still expecting new successes, but I can't remember which systems were
failing that were reporting eliminated dead code in LABELS.)

Regards,


Erik.

On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 10:08 PM, Erik Huelsmann <ehuels at gmail.com> wrote:

> Ok. I understand the problem now. This is indeed caused by my commit,
> however, the old code had a similar problem -- not with LABELS, but with
> FLET, which apparently nobody ever ran into yet: There's a problem in the
> order of macro-expansion versus binding the local functions to shadow
> macros in the lexical environment.
>
> Working on a fix now.
>
> On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 9:10 PM, Erik Huelsmann <ehuels at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Ah. This is probably the compiled version which fails. The interpreted
>> version is the one I ran.
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 9, 2015 at 9:09 PM, Anton Vodonosov <avodonosov at yandex.ru>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Reproduce it like this:
>>>
>>>   (ql:quickload :cl-cont-test)
>>>   (let ((rtest::*compile-tests* t)) (rtest:do-tests))
>>>
>>> The RT test framework has two modes, rtest::*compile-tests* == t and nil.
>>> cl-test-grid runs both modes.
>>>
>>> > Did the cl-cont tests run in their own ABCL instance?
>>> Yes, separate ABCL process.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> - Anton
>>>
>>> 09.04.2015, 21:55, "Erik Huelsmann" <ehuels at gmail.com>:
>>> > Hi Anton,
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 12:12 AM, Anton Vodonosov <avodonosov at yandex.ru>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> 07.04.2015, 01:07, "Erik Huelsmann" <ehuels at gmail.com>:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Bummer that the change causes regressions and no improvements.
>>> >>
>>> >> Note, we don't know exactly what of the changes between release 1.3.1
>>> and the current dev version
>>> >> causes the regressions, it's not necessary the last commit.
>>> >
>>> > Sure. That's no problem. However, I'm not understanding something: I
>>> tested the cl-cont LABELS-2 and -3 failures. On my own system they didn't
>>> fail. Is there something in the tester environment that could make it fail?
>>> Did the cl-cont tests run in their own ABCL instance? Or did they run after
>>> lots of other test in the same instance?
>>> >
>>> > Regards,
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Bye,
>>> >
>>> > Erik.
>>> >
>>> > http://efficito.com -- Hosted accounting and ERP.
>>> > Robust and Flexible. No vendor lock-in.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Bye,
>>
>> Erik.
>>
>> http://efficito.com -- Hosted accounting and ERP.
>> Robust and Flexible. No vendor lock-in.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Bye,
>
> Erik.
>
> http://efficito.com -- Hosted accounting and ERP.
> Robust and Flexible. No vendor lock-in.
>



-- 
Bye,

Erik.

http://efficito.com -- Hosted accounting and ERP.
Robust and Flexible. No vendor lock-in.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.common-lisp.net/pipermail/armedbear-devel/attachments/20150409/c0521d63/attachment-0001.html>