Re: Some comments on the ansi test suite
Raymond Toy <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.lisp.clocc.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
>>>>> "Peter" == Peter Van Eynde <[email protected]> writes: Peter> On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 09:38:28AM -0400, Raymond Toy wrote: Peter> These are part of the less useful history of ansi-test. It came from an Peter> implementation that seems to have had its share of numeric bugs. So Peter> there are a lot of simple tests like this. Of course they fall on their Peter> face the moment you change fp format... >> >> What do you propose? Leave them? Remove them? Change them to be be >> an approximately equal type of test instead of equality? Peter> Replace them with a better test would be nice. As most of them are fp Better tests will be tricky since it's hard to tell when close is close enough, but I suppose I could come up with some rough estimates. Peter> problems we should (IMHO) replace them with "zero knowledge" tests or Peter> remove them. What do you mean by "zero knowledge" tests? There are also a few other bugs that I forgot to mention: IOFKTS-LEGACY-881 says all 10 characters are used up. I think this is wrong because vector-push-extend is supposed to be used. SECTION14-LEGACY-1604 says CMUCL is wrong for returning ("B" C B 4 1 1). I think it's valid for the compiler to coalesce the two "B" strings in the two lists into one and thus make them eq. Ray ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Stuff, things, and much much more. http://thinkgeek.com/sf