On 30.07.2024 21:51, Tomas Volf wrote: > Hello, > > I think I found a bug in (srfi srfi-64) module shipped with GNU Guile. > > The specification says the following regarding the test-apply: > >> If one or more specifiers are listed then only tests matching the specifiers >> are executed. > That implies that specifiers are optional and the following code should work: > > (use-modules (srfi srfi-64)) > (test-apply (λ () #t)) > > However it does not: > > Backtrace: > In ice-9/boot-9.scm: > 1752:10 8 (with-exception-handler _ _ #:unwind? _ #:unwind-for-type _) > In unknown file: > 7 (apply-smob/0 #<thunk 7fdf6ecc4300>) > In ice-9/boot-9.scm: > 724:2 6 (call-with-prompt _ _ #<procedure default-prompt-handler (k > proc)>) > In ice-9/eval.scm: > 619:8 5 (_ #(#(#<directory (guile-user) 7fdf6ecc7c80>))) > In ice-9/boot-9.scm: > 2836:4 4 (save-module-excursion _) > 4388:12 3 (_) > In srfi/srfi-64/testing.scm: > 947:34 2 (test-apply #<procedure 7fdf63956108 at > /home/wolf/src/guile-wolfsden/tests/s…>) > 938:47 1 (test-apply #<procedure 7fdf63956108 at > /home/wolf/src/guile-wolfsden/test…> . _) > In unknown file: > 0 (reverse #t) > > ERROR: In procedure reverse: > In procedure reverse: Wrong type argument in position 1: #t > > Have a nice day > Tomas Volf
If anyone's wondering why I don't want to work with the upstream SRFI-64 code, reading the implementation of test-apply is all you need. :-) It almost makes me think it must be machine-generated code, or intentionally obfuscated. But anyway. My implementation actually had a similar bug, but it should be fixed now with this commit: https://codeberg.org/taylan/scheme-srfis/commit/3091e3b863d53a012b4be4376814bb67bf09020d I've also noticed the other issue with test-apply that you reported as a separate bug report, and will fix that later. Thanks a ton for all these reports, because it seems you've really caught a ton of edge-cases, and some glaring issues in seldom-used parts of the API. - Taylan
