On a, presumably, related note, there seems to be another problem
with thew new random:
* (random (1- (expt 2 31)))
debugger invoked on a SIMPLE-TYPE-ERROR: Argument X is not a INTEGER:
Type HELP for debugger help, or (SB-EXT:QUIT) to exit from SBCL.
restarts (invokable by number or by possibly-abbreviated name):
0: [ABORT] Exit debugger, returning to top level.
(SB-KERNEL:TWO-ARG-IOR NIL 2520021)
0: (SB-KERNEL:TWO-ARG-IOR NIL 2520021)
#S(RANDOM-STATE :STATE #.(MAKE-ARRAY 627 :ELEMENT-TYPE
'(0 2567483615 4 4357
(I discovered this via a failure in sb-posix-tests/UTIMES.1, which
is, coincidentally, where I had triggered a bug that I fixed in
220.127.116.11, but this seems to be unrelated to that.)
On Mar 28, 2007, at 9:48 AM, William Harold Newman wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 06:14:20PM +0200, Harald Hanche-Olsen wrote:
>> + Peter Graves <peter@...>:
>> | On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 at 09:39:55 -0500, William Harold Newman wrote:
>> | > I'd be interested in hearing from anyone who can test 18.104.22.168 on
>> | > x86-64 whether it works this time.
>> | 22.214.171.124 builds OK on Linux x86-64 (using 126.96.36.199 as build host).
>> | There is one unexpected test failure:
>> | Finished running tests.
>> | Status:
>> | Failure: arith.pure.lisp / LOGCOUNT
>> FWIW, I see the same failure on macosx/ppc (sbcl 188.8.131.52), so this
>> be a portable bug. 8-)
> Thank you both for the quick feedback.
> The test seems to be ambiguous about whether it's a bug in RANDOM. The
> new RANDOM code in general provides a different output sequence than
> the old, so the change to the new RANDOM code could trigger different
> failures in the LOGCOUNT test even without any bugs in RANDOM. On the
> other hand, the failure could be caused by another bug in the new
> RANDOM code, e.g., a TYPE-ERROR signalled from within the RANDOM call.
> If anyone reasons "where there was one bug, there are probably more,"
> and thus checks whether the new RANDOM code is at fault by determining
> what kind of exception is signalled where in that test, I will try not
> to brazen it out if RANDOM is found guilty again.
> William Harold Newman <william.newman@...>
> PGP key fingerprint 85 CE 1C BA 79 8D 51 8C B9 25 FB EE E0 C3 E5 7C
> Ubi saeva indignatio ulterius cor lacerare nequit. -- Jonathan
> Swift's epitaph
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to
> share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
> Sbcl-devel mailing list