Camm Maguire wrote:
Thank you, and my apologies for the question. I'm trying to hurry this summer, and am using your wonderful tet suite largely as a replacement for me having to read and parse the spec in detail myself. I should have known that you'd get it right, but I just had the nagging question that this might have been designed to fit other complying implementations.
One way I dropped the ball in the test suite was traceability back to the specification. I'm going to try to add comments explaining some of the more obscure tests, but it will take a while.
Is it true that your suite checks the integrity of the compiled or interpreted functions as supplied in the image, and not the result of any compiler inlining or replacement of such functions, except in the random tester? I'd like to deduce from the ansi test results if possible that I haven't messed up compiler inlining of #'member et.al. for example.
You want to run the random type prop tests. Start lisp, then: (load "gclload1.lsp") (load "random-type-prop-tests.lsp") These tests are explicitly designed to test type-driven compiler specializations of built-in functions. The member tests are in random-type-prop-tests-05.lsp. The def-type-prop-test macro prepends "RANDOM-TYPE-PROP." to the specified name to get the name of the test, so the tests you want are (in the CL-TEST package) named random-type-prop.member.1 through random-type-prop.member.6. Note: the tests of destructive functions here may be wrong, because of issues with modification of literal constants in compiled code. Paul _______________________________________________ Gcl-devel mailing list Gcl-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcl-devel