[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gcl-devel] Latest ansi-test fixes
From: |
Camm Maguire |
Subject: |
Re: [Gcl-devel] Latest ansi-test fixes |
Date: |
06 Oct 2002 00:16:38 -0400 |
"Paul F. Dietz" <address@hidden> writes:
> Camm Maguire wrote:
> > Greetings! I've just checked in some fixes bringing the number of
> > failed tests (for me) down to one. A few comments:
> >
> > 1) I cleared up a few compiler warnings for the built in .lsp files
> > in lsp/. I don't yet fully understand packages, so the changes
> > might still need some work.
> >
> > a) Eliminated (in-package 'system) from defstruct.lsp.
>
> Are you using the package tests I wasn't loading? If so, do they
> run through at all? If they do, I'll uncomment the load forms
> from gclload2.lsp.
Just a further note that I think I cleared your package issue you
brought up on the website. This may enable (at least partially), your
package tests.
>
> > d) The one remaining failure I don't yet understand, and would
> > like some clarification:
> >
> > Improper subtype: SIMPLE-BASE-STRING of SIMPLE-BIT-VECTOR
> > Improper subtype: SIMPLE-BASE-STRING of SIMPLE-VECTOR
> > Improper subtype: SIMPLE-BASE-STRING of BIT-VECTOR
> > Improper subtype: BASE-STRING of BIT-VECTOR
> > Test TYPES-4 failed
> > Form: (TYPES-4-BODY)
> > Expected value: 0
> > Actual value: 4.
> >
> > What condition makes these improper? I looked at the test
> > code but don't understand it yet.
>
> This looks busted. I'll look into it.
>
>
> > 4) We seem to be moving at a reasonable clip in the ansi compliance
> > direction, though much work doubtlessly remains. We hadn't
> > targeted ansi-compliance for the 2.5.0 release. Is this work
> > nevertheless still the highest priority for most people? Is anyone
> > else having more severe troubles which should be addressed first?
> > Also, at the current rate, how far off is "reasonable"
> > ansi-compliance, in units of months?
>
> You seem to be fixing ANSI problems as fast as they are found, so
> the time would seem to be controlled by how fast we can get everything
> tested adequately. I'd guess three to six months?
>
> I've just checked in tests for the 'characters' section of the spec.
> There are four failing test cases:
>
> -- #\Rubout is incorrectly reported to be a graphic character
> (GRAPHIC-CHAR.2)
> -- CHAR-NAME is producing incorrect strings on several characters
> (CHAR-NAME.[234])
>
These should be fixed too.
Take care,
> Paul
>
>
>
--
Camm Maguire address@hidden
==========================================================================
"The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens." -- Baha'u'llah