Test status

[Robert Goldman]

Sorry -- I got the markdown all stuffed up in my last message.  I think 
it's readable, though.

Best,
r


On 24 Jan 2018, at 15:58, Robert Goldman wrote:

> On 24 Jan 2018, at 15:39, Ilya Perminov wrote:
>
>> Hi Robert,
>>
>> To "revert" my patch manually just revert this change:
>>
>> --- old-iterate/iterate.lisp	2018-01-15 16:49:24.171636397 -0800
>> +++ new-iterate/iterate.lisp	2018-01-15 16:49:24.171636397 -0800
>> @@ -3374,7 +3374,7 @@
>>      (if (not (and (integerp n) (> n 0)))
>>  	(clause-error "~a should be a positive integer" n-expr)
>>  	;; Here, n is a positive integer.
>> -	(let* ((p-i (intern-previous-info var))
>> +	(let* ((p-i (intern-previous-info var :next))
>>  	       (init-val (make-initial-value default default? (var-type 
>> var)))
>>  	       (temp (if (not (duplicable? init-val))
>>  			 (make-var-and-default-binding
>>
>> i.e. remove :next from (intern-previous-info var :next).
>> I only tested my patch on SBCL 1.3.0 and it did not break any tests. 
>> The BUG
>> tests failed, but everything else passed.
>>
>> Ilya
>
> On MacOS, with SBCL 1.3.14, I get 5 failures:
>
> ```
> 5 out of 268 total tests failed: ITERATE.TEST::ALWAYS.FINALLY,
>    ITERATE.TEST::NEVER.FINALLY, ITERATE.TEST::THEREIS.FINALLY,
>    ITERATE.TEST::BUG/WALK.2, ITERATE.TEST::BUG/COLLECT-AT-BEGINNING.;
> ```
>
> I also see this:
> ```
> ; caught STYLE-WARNING:
> ;   undefined function: ITERATE:MULTIPLYING
> ;
> ; compilation unit finished
> ;   Undefined function:
> ;     ITERATE:MULTIPLYING
> ;   caught 1 ERROR condition
> ;   caught 1 WARNING condition
> ;   caught 1 STYLE-WARNING condition
> ```
>
> This is from loading the test system -- iterate itself loads without 
> problems.
>
> I'm not sure why this happens:  I see this:
> ```
> iterate.lisp
> 2872:(defsynonym multiplying multiply)
>
> ```
> and `multiplying` seems to be exported from package.lisp.
>
> The error occurs in `bug/macrolet.2`
>
> One thing I don't understand -- the test suite seems to use `:SB-RT` 
> on SBCL, which is *not* the same as the `RT` package.  Any idea what's 
> going on here?  Definitely caused me some confusion as a 
> not-normally-SBCL user.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.common-lisp.net/pipermail/iterate-devel/attachments/20180124/4341b890/attachment-0001.html>