ABCL 1.9.1 regression: COMPILE-FILE-PATHNAME
Robert Munyer <[email protected]> Fri, 03 Mar 2023 16:47:56 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.editors.j.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
I just looked at the Maxima build problem, which I wasn't aware of until I
saw the recent message that mentioned it. ABCL 1.9.0's COMPILE-FILE-PATHNAME
did not cause the problem; it behaved correctly according to the CL spec.
Here is the value of
(compile-file-pathname "/mnt/maxima-5.46.0/src/numerical/f2cl-package.lisp"
:output-file
"binary-abcl/numerical/f2cl-package.abcl")
in four Lisps (CCL 1.12.1, SBCL 2.1.1.debian, ABCL 1.9.0, and ABCL 1.9.1):
#P"/mnt/maxima-5.46.0/src/numerical/binary-abcl/numerical/f2cl-package.abcl"
#P"/mnt/maxima-5.46.0/src/numerical/binary-abcl/numerical/f2cl-package.abcl"
#P"/mnt/maxima-5.46.0/src/numerical/binary-abcl/numerical/f2cl-package.abcl"
#P"/mnt/maxima-5.46.0/src/binary-abcl/numerical/f2cl-package.abcl"
As you can see, the last one (ABCL 1.9.1) is the one that diverges.
I repeated that test for all of the COMPILE-FILE-PATHNAME invocations
in the failed Maxima build. In every case, CCL and SBCL and ABCL 1.9.0
confirmed each others' results.
ABCL 1.9.0's COMPILE-FILE-PATHNAME produced bad output only because it
received bad input.