EXPECTED test failures & clisp

[Pascal J. Bourguignon]

"Robert P. Goldman" <rpgoldman at sift.net> writes:

> Do we have a way of indicating that we expect a test to fail?
>
> There's a string in the output that talks about "Unexpected test
> failures in..." but I am not sure if there's actually any notion of
> expected vs. unexpected test failure.  IIRC in the past when I knew a
> test would fail I just used reader macros to make sure it wouldn't run.
>
> This is actually not as good as having the test run but not cause a failure.
>
> I ask because I get test failures in clisp on run-program, because
> somehow clisp lets the common-lisp prompt leak into the output of
> running a program.  So I get something like
>
> ("[4]> hello, world") instead of ("hello, world")
>
> IIRC this is a known clisp problem, 

It looks to me rather like a bug in the test.  
You're not capturing the output of the program correctly.

Actually, you would have to work very hard to get this concatenation.  I
have no idea why you would do that.

[10]> (with-open-stream (in (run-program "bash" 
                              :arguments '("-c" "echo 'Hello, world!'")
                              :output :stream))
        (read-line in))
"Hello, world!" ;
NIL
[11]> 


> and may even be fixed in the clisp
> source. But there hasn't been a clisp release for almost five years now,
> and I don't intend to build it from source.
>
> With no releases since 2010, IMO clisp is only "living dead," and
> possibly simply "dead."

With less than 80 open issues, clisp doesn't NEED any new release for
now. 

-- 
__Pascal Bourguignon__                 http://www.informatimago.com/
“The factory of the future will have only two employees, a man and a
dog. The man will be there to feed the dog. The dog will be there to
keep the man from touching the equipment.” -- Carl Bass CEO Autodesk