Custom Query (1030 matches)
Results (832 - 834 of 1030)
| Ticket | Resolution | Summary | Owner | Reporter |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| #962 | fixed | Compiler bug found while compiling QRes | ||
| Description |
Using Clozure Common Lisp Version 1.8-r15341M (LinuxX8664) Simplified form to tickle the bug: (defun compiler-bug (n &aux dst)
"Takes n; returns n-1 if it works, n when this bug is tickled."
(declare (type fixnum n)
(optimize (safety 0) (debug 3)))
(loop
for idx1 fixnum below n
for idx2 fixnum from 0
do (setf dst idx1))
dst)
More variants in attachment. Worked in Clozure Common Lisp Version 1.7-r15111M (LinuxX8664). |
|||
| #964 | duplicate | Tests fails for the MD5 library on 32 bit versions (windows and linux) | ||
| Description |
I run the tests included in the library. Only appears in 32 bit versions of 1.8, not in 1.7 and it works on Linux x64. I use MD5 library that is used by Hunchentoot (it fails inside it as well). |
|||
| #970 | invalid | DIRECTORY includes directories by default | ||
| Description |
I think that DIRECTORY is out of compliance with the (albeit fuzzy in this regard) ANSI CL as well as the CCL documentation for said function. According to the ANSI CL, DIRECTORY should return "files", and by "files" it is pretty clear it does not refer to directories. The spec gives plenty of wiggle room for extensions, however. CCL provides the extension keyword options :DIRECTORIES and :FILES to specify whether directories and/or files are considered. :DIRECTORIES should default to nil according to the CCL docs (and my interpretation of ANSI CL compliance) but actually defaults to T (from usage results and source code inspection.) Thus the bare, naked usage of DIRECTORY, such as (DIRECTORY "*") will provide directories, if any are found, in the results. If CCL's DIRECTORY defaults to :DIRECTORY nil, it would be in compliance as far as this point goes. However, I think there is further work to ensure that DIRECTORY (and related functions like PROBE-FILE) are consistent and compliant in the treatment of pathnames. That will be the subject of a follow up either here or the the mailing list. Man do I feel like a nit picking Lisper now! |
|||
