[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gcl-devel] New random tester failures

From: Paul F. Dietz
Subject: Re: [Gcl-devel] New random tester failures
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 07:05:49 -0600
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040803

Camm Maguire wrote:

Indeed.  OK, took a stab at a more general solution in CVS now.  There
is a quite loquacious compiler note for now describing the reasoning
whereby the compiler inserts type declarations into let and let*
bodies, and bodies following lambda expressions, whether the bindings
are introduced by macros or not.  This can be expanded upon further,
primarily through careful proclamation of our existing functions.  >2k
random tester iterations pass,

I've run 91K iterations of the random tester overnight with terms
of size (1+ (random 200)).  I've now changed the random tester's
probabilities to make LET/LET* forms more often and am running
it again with terms of size (1+ (random 1000)).

No failures yet (I reduced the chance of setf/incf/etc. so the
incf/decf bug has not yet been encountered.)


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]