Re: [Bug 2136852] [NEW] SB-VM::MOVE-WORD-ARG is not the name of a defined VOP.

Stas Boukarev <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.lisp.steel-bank.devel
Message-ID <CAF63=13RK9kEmTP7tJ_zxVnoBjiPin==9DoC6HtpDf2uxk7vqA@mail.gmail.com>
VOP inheritance is removed outside of sb-devel. I know what this means
and nobody would understand

#<TN t1 :NORMAL ANY-REG FIXNUM> is not valid as the first argument to VOP:
  CAR-EQ-IF-LISTP
Primitive type: FIXNUM
SC restrictions:
  (DESCRIPTOR-REG)
The primitive type disallows these loadable SCs:
  (DESCRIPTOR-REG)

without also running sb-devel, so I don't bother with it.

On Wed, Dec 24, 2025 at 2:49 PM Christophe Rhodes via Sbcl-devel
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> There have been a number of recent reports like this one recently, where
> the compiler fails with:
>
> "Paul F. Dietz" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > SB-VM::MOVE-WORD-ARG is not the name of a defined VOP.
> >    [Condition of type SIMPLE-ERROR]
> >
> > Backtrace:
> >   0: (SB-C::VOP-PARSE-OR-LOSE SB-VM::MOVE-WORD-ARG)
> >   1: (SB-C::GET-OPERAND-INFO #<SB-C:TN-REF :TN #<SB-C:TN t1 :NORMAL> :WRITE-P NIL :VOP SB-VM::MOVE-WORD-ARG>)
> >   2: (SB-C::BAD-COERCE-ERROR #<SB-C:TN-REF :TN #<SB-C:TN t1 :NORMAL> :WRITE-P NIL :VOP SB-VM::MOVE-WORD-ARG>)
> >   3: (SB-C::EMIT-COERCE-VOP #<SB-C:TN-REF :TN #<SB-C:TN t1 :NORMAL> :WRITE-P NIL :VOP SB-VM::MOVE-WORD-ARG> #<SB-C:TN t2 :ALIAS to X!3> #(NIL NIL T NIL NIL NIL ...) #<SB-C::VOP :INFO SB-C:ALLOCATE-FRAME :A..
> > [...]
>
> Thank you for fixing the compiler bugs that this reveals!  However,
> there's a second problem, perhaps cosmetic, but I think we should look
> at it.  What this is *meant* to do is provide a nice human-readable
> internal compiler error about why MOVE-WORD-ARG (or other vops, like
> CAR-EQ-IF-LISTP) was not usable in this situation -- some kind of
> mismatch between SCs, not being able to find MOVE vops to move between
> them.  Instead, we're getting a note that we can't find the
> MOVE-WORD-ARG vop by name.  Is this because we have started shaking out
> more than we used to?  Judging by versions of SBCL I have lying around,
> this change is between 1 and 2 years old, so it's clearly not critical,
> but if this is the new normal we should probably change BAD-COERCE-ERROR
> not to do things that will always fail.
>
> Christophe
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sbcl-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sbcl-devel


_______________________________________________
Sbcl-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sbcl-devel
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.