From: Thiemo S. <th...@ne...> - 2005-04-23 01:56:26
|
Brian Mastenbrook wrote: > Thiemo Seufer wrote: > >I had a closer look and found a lot more bugs than expected. The > >resulting diff against CVS HEAD is >50k and improves stability of > >the mips port significantly. I'll split it in pieces and add a short > >explanation to each. > > Wow. Nice work. A few questions: > > Does the resulting SBCL build itself and pass its tests? I did several build-bootstrap cycles with 0.8.21.16, the patch against CVS is nearly identical to what I used there. The non-passing tests remained consistent, the last part of the patch series excludes the failing bits for now. Most of them are also problematic on other architectures. > Have you run the ANSI tests on it? No, I concentrated on stopping it to crash first. :-) > Have you tested your patch on non-MIPS? No. I was careful to avoid unsafe changes for other architectures, so I expect it to work as before there, but of course there is always the possibility to miss a bit. Thiemo |