Re: compile-file return values?

Hi Ray,

The test file asdf/test/compile-asdf.lisp tries to catch compile errors and warnings including some style-warnings.

I propose using the c::brevity extension to suppress the efficiency notes and then check the second value returned by compile-file. 
  For example:

(proclaim '(optimize (speed 2) (safety 3) #-allegro (debug 3)
	    #+(or scl cmu) (c::brevity 2)))

However this does not work on the current cmucl because the second value returned does not include style-warnings, so unused 
variable warnings etc are not caught in this test.

The ANSI-CL standard suggests that the second return value should be true for style-warnings, as well as other warnings and errors, 
so the original cmucl code seems right to me.

Perhaps there was some other issue here.

Regards
Douglas Crosher



On 25/03/11 04:40, Raymond Toy wrote:
>>>>>> "Douglas" == Douglas Crosher<[email protected]>  writes:
>
>      Douglas>  While check the ASDF 2 tests it appears that CMUCL may
>      Douglas>  not be returning the expected value for the second return
>      Douglas>  value of 'compile-file.  The standard appears to state
>      Douglas>  that the second value should be true if there are
>      Douglas>  style-warnings, warnings, or errors. However CMUCL
>      Douglas>  ignores style-warnings.  This appears to be a regression,
>      Douglas>  as it had been: (not (null error-severity))
>
> Hi Douglas!
>
> Thanks for the note.  Can you tell me which asdf2 test complains about
> this.
>
> A check of the commit logs doesn't provide any information about why
> this was changed. (It happened when adding support for package locks.)
>
> Ray
>
> _______________________________________________
> cmucl-imp mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.zs64.net/mailman/listinfo/cmucl-imp
>

_______________________________________________
cmucl-imp mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.zs64.net/mailman/listinfo/cmucl-imp