Custom Query (1030 matches)

Filters
 
Or
 
  
 
Columns

Show under each result:


Results (811 - 813 of 1030)

Ticket Resolution Summary Owner Reporter
#913 fixed &WHOLE broken in DEFINE-METHOD-COMBINATION Greg Pfeil
Description

Using &WHOLE in the lambda list for the :ARGUMENTS section of the long form of DEFINE-METHOD-COMBINATION results in an UNBOUND-VARIABLE condition. Here's a simple test case:

CL-USER> (define-method-combination test ()
             ((primary () :required t))
           (:arguments &whole whole)
           (format t "this is it: ~A" whole)
           `(call-method ,(first primary) ,(rest primary)))
;Compiler warnings :
;   In an anonymous lambda form: Undeclared free variable #:ARGS
TEST
CL-USER> (defgeneric foo (x)
           (:method-combination test)
           (:method (x) x))
#<STANDARD-GENERIC-FUNCTION FOO #x30200127BC6F>
CL-USER> (foo 3)

You can see the warning when the method combination is defined, then the call results in:

Unbound variable: #:ARGS
   [Condition of type UNBOUND-VARIABLE]

This is on CCL Version 1.8-dev-r15225M-trunk (DarwinX8664)

#915 fixed bad printing of dotted pairs with *print-circle* = t Gary Byers Matt Kaufmann
Description

An extra "." can be printed when *print-circle* is t. A log is below. The version (15230) is the trunk as of two days ago. Not sure how to specify the "component" -- I'd guess it's a source code bug, but I don't know.

Welcome to Clozure Common Lisp Version 1.8-dev-r15230M-trunk  (LinuxX8664)!
? (let* ((*print-circle* t)
	 (atm "hi")
	 (alist `((3 . ,atm) (2 . ,atm))))
    (print alist))

((3 . #1= . "hi") (2 . #1#)) 
((3 . "hi") (2 . "hi"))
? '((3 . #1= . "hi") (2 . #1#))  ; the extra dot ruins readability, of course:

> Error: Reader error on #<CCL::RECORDING-CHARACTER-INPUT-STREAM #x3020006EDE3D>, near position 13:
>        Dot context error in ".".
> While executing: CCL::SIGNAL-READER-ERROR, in process listener(1).
> Type :POP to abort, :R for a list of available restarts.
> Type :? for other options.
1 > :q
? '((3 . #1="hi") (2 . #1#)) ; manual correction
((3 . "hi") (2 . "hi"))
?

#918 fixed Strange stack overflow in remove-if-not Gary Byers uchida
Description

I think this is a compiler bug.

(defun test-func ()
;;  (declare (optimize (speed 0) (safety 2)))           ;-> success
  (declare (optimize (speed 0) (safety 3)))             ;-> error
  (dotimes (i 10000)
    (remove-if-not #'(lambda (e)
		       (eql i e))
		   '(a))))

(loop for i from 1 to 50000 do
     (format t "i=~A~%" i)
     (let ((t1 (ccl:process-run-function "t1" #'test-func))
	   (t2 (ccl:process-run-function "t2" #'test-func)))
       (ccl:join-process t1)
       (ccl:join-process t2)))

...
i=275
i=276
i=277
i=278
> > Error: Stack overflow on value stack.
> > While executing: CCL::LIST-DELETE-MODERATELY-COMPLEX, in process t2(557).

;;;
;;; #<PROCESS t2(557) [Active] #xC367F56> requires access to Shared
Terminal Input
;;; Type (:y 557) to yield control to this thread.
;;;
Batch Modify
Note: See TracBatchModify for help on using batch modify.
Note: See TracQuery for help on using queries.