Re: Some comments on the ansi test suite

[Raymond T. <to...@rt...>]

>>>>> "Peter" == Peter Van Eynde <pva...@de...> writes:

    Peter> On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 09:38:28AM -0400, Raymond Toy wrote:
    Peter> These are part of the less useful history of ansi-test. It came from an
    Peter> implementation that seems to have had its share of numeric bugs. So
    Peter> there are a lot of simple tests like this. Of course they fall on their
    Peter> face the moment you change fp format... 
    >> 
    >> What do you propose?  Leave them?  Remove them?  Change them to be be
    >> an approximately equal type of test instead of equality?

    Peter> Replace them with a better test would be nice. As most of them are fp

Better tests will be tricky since it's hard to tell when close is
close enough, but I suppose I could come up with some rough estimates.

    Peter> problems we should (IMHO) replace them with "zero knowledge" tests or
    Peter> remove them.

What do you mean by "zero knowledge" tests?

There are also a few other bugs that I forgot to mention:

IOFKTS-LEGACY-881 says all 10 characters are used up.  I think this is
wrong because vector-push-extend is supposed to be used.

SECTION14-LEGACY-1604 says CMUCL is wrong for returning ("B" C B 4 1
1).  I think it's valid for the compiler to coalesce the two "B"
strings in the two lists into one and thus make them eq.

Ray