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
> 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.
Get latest updates about Open Source Projects, Conferences and News.