Update of /cvsroot/sbcl/sbcl
In directory fdv4jf1.ch3.sourceforge.com:/tmp/cvs-serv20459
220.127.116.11: rewrite bug 217
* Case A is a non-issue. SBCL interprets "unpredictable but harmless"
to mean "anything, but heap will no be corrupted, data lost, etc"
-- that is, an error may or may not be signalled, but it the lisp
session will remain sane and operable.
* Case B is negated by the portability argument: since specifying both
is unspecified, we should not build useful-seeming extensions on top
of it, as it will only create portability problems for users.
* Case C remains partially valid, except for the runtime WARNINGs.
Integrated into the new text.
RCS file: /cvsroot/sbcl/sbcl/BUGS,v
retrieving revision 1.553
retrieving revision 1.554
diff -u -d -r1.553 -r1.554
--- BUGS 19 Dec 2008 15:20:43 -0000 1.553
+++ BUGS 19 Dec 2008 16:14:58 -0000 1.554
@@ -606,21 +606,14 @@
can erroneously return T.
215: ":TEST-NOT handling by functions"
- a. FIND and POSITION currently signal errors when given non-NIL for
- both their :TEST and (deprecated) :TEST-NOT arguments, but by
- ANSI 17.2 "the consequences are unspecified", which by ANSI 1.4.2
- means that the effect is "unpredictable but harmless". It's not
- clear what that actually means; it may preclude conforming
- implementations from signalling errors.
- b. COUNT, REMOVE and the like give priority to a :TEST-NOT argument
- when conflict occurs. As a quality of implementation issue, it
- might be preferable to treat :TEST and :TEST-NOT as being in some
- sense the same &KEY, and effectively take the first test function in
- the argument list.
- c. Again, a quality of implementation issue: it would be good to issue a
- STYLE-WARNING at compile-time for calls with :TEST-NOT, and a
- WARNING for calls with both :TEST and :TEST-NOT; possibly this
- latter should be WARNed about at execute-time too.
+ We should verify that our handling of :TEST-NOT and :TEST is consistent
+ for all functions that accept them: that is, signal an error if both
+ are specified.
+ Similarly, a compile-time full warning for calls with both would be good.
+ We might also consider a compile-time style warning for :TEST-NOT.
216: "debugger confused by frames with invalid number of arguments"
In sbcl-0.7.8.51, executing e.g. (VECTOR-PUSH-EXTEND T), BACKTRACE, Q
RCS file: /cvsroot/sbcl/sbcl/version.lisp-expr,v
retrieving revision 1.4221
retrieving revision 1.4222
diff -u -d -r1.4221 -r1.4222
--- version.lisp-expr 19 Dec 2008 15:20:44 -0000 1.4221
+++ version.lisp-expr 19 Dec 2008 16:14:58 -0000 1.4222
@@ -17,4 +17,4 @@
;;; checkins which aren't released. (And occasionally for internal
;;; versions, especially for internal versions off the main CVS
;;; branch, it gets hairier, e.g. "0.pre7.14.flaky4.13".)