Re: [Sbcl-help] compile function v. dynamic eval of defun

[<bil...@mi...>]

Thanks for your rapid reply.

I realize a reproducible test case is what you need to go further, and I'll try to develop that - and I'll move to 1.0.53 as well as trying this on a linux box. 

That said, I was trying to establish whether I should expect different results (or if this is a known issue) from the two different methods of producing a compiled function dynamically, hence showing the compilations are made in essentially identical lexical environments, and that the code being compiled is basically identical.

To directly answer your question on EQUATION-AGGREGATOR, here's the source, and in this case, fn is bound to #'+:

(defun equation-aggregator (fn &rest args)
  (declare (optimize (speed 3) (safety 0)))
  (let ((tmp (delete nil args)))
    (if tmp
	(reduce fn tmp)
	0d0)))

-----Original Message-----
>From: Nikodemus Siivola <nik...@ra...>
>Sent: Nov 30, 2011 4:04 AM
>To: bil...@mi...
>Cc: sbc...@li...
>Subject: Re: [Sbcl-help] compile function v. dynamic eval of defun
>
>On 30 November 2011 11:08,  <bil...@mi...> wrote:
>
>> I haven't been able to generate a simpler case to show the issue - the simpler cases
>> all work as they ought, yielding identical results.
>
>Hi,
>
>First of, you may want to try with 1.0.53 (or current master), as FP
>traps on OS X have seen some work since 1.0.52.
>
>Second, can you please provide definitions for the functions called in
>your test-cast, and a sample run where you show how to call them and
>the results you get.
>
>Ie. something I can just copy and paste into my repl (or a file I can
>load, etc) to see the issue without needing to wonder what
>EQUATION-AGGREGATOR is or what kind of arguments I'm supposed to
>provide.
>
>Cheers,
>
> -- Nikodemus