On 30.09.2024 20:50, Taylan Kammer wrote: > 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 > By the way, I just noticed another issue with test-apply:
It will sometimes call the supplied test runner's on-final handler, and sometimes not. I had made sure to imitate the behavior one-to-one in my own SRFI-64 implementation, but looking at the code one more time and pondering on the behavior a bit, this seems rather arbitrary and most likely not intended. So, I've changed it in my implementation so that the on-final handler will always be called at the end when using test-apply. Fix is implemented with this commit: https://codeberg.org/taylan/scheme-srfis/commit/a33b9f0cd4558d255605eccfa1a59111b8eb3716 - Taylan
