20 Apr 2010 00:44
COMPILE-FILE.2 & COMPILE-FILE.2A
Sam Steingold <sds <at> gnu.org>
2010-04-19 22:44:55 GMT
2010-04-19 22:44:55 GMT
The aforementioned tests check that compile-file reports warnings and style-warnings generated by the code being compiled (as opposed to the compiler itself) as its secondary and tertiary values. http://www.lispworks.com/documentation/HyperSpec/Body/f_cmp_fi.htm The secondary value, warnings-p, is false if no conditions of type error or warning were detected by the compiler, and true otherwise. The tertiary value, failure-p, is false if no conditions of type error or warning (other than style-warning) were detected by the compiler, and true otherwise. the tests assume that if the code being compile does something like (eval-when (:compile-toplevel) (define-condition w (warning) nil)) (warn (make-condition 'w))) then the compiler must notice this and report this (second value being T). It seems to me that the spec requires the 2nd and 3rd values to reflect the signaling from within the compiler, not whatever is signaled by the code being compiled. do you agree with my interpretation of the spec? -- -- Sam Steingold <http://sds.podval.org>
RSS Feed