GNU bug report logs - #72374
srfi-64: test-apply does not accept convenience specifiers

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 72374 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 72374 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Tomas Volf <~@wolfsden.cz>
To: bug-guile <at> gnu.org
Subject: srfi-64: test-apply does not accept convenience specifiers
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 21:51:55 +0200

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.

The specifiers are defined in `Test specifiers' section:

> [..] For convenience, a specifier may also be a non-procedure value, which is
> coerced to a specifier procedure, as described below for count and name.

That means that following should work:

    (use-modules (srfi srfi-64))
    (test-apply 1 (λ () (test-assert #t)))

However it does not:

    Backtrace:
    In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
      1752:10 12 (with-exception-handler _ _ #:unwind? _ #:unwind-for-type _)
    In unknown file:
              11 (apply-smob/0 #<thunk 7fd0803c7300>)
    In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
        724:2 10 (call-with-prompt _ _ #<procedure default-prompt-handler (k proc)>)
    In ice-9/eval.scm:
        619:8  9 (_ #(#(#<directory (guile-user) 7fd0803cac80>)))
    In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
       2836:4  8 (save-module-excursion _)
      4388:12  7 (_)
    In srfi/srfi-64/testing.scm:
       947:34  6 (test-apply 1 #<procedure 7fd074b30108 at /home/wolf/src/guile-wolfsden/tests…>)
       944:21  5 (test-apply _ #<procedure 7fd074b30108 at /home/wolf/src/guile-wolfsden/tests…>)
       688:12  4 (_)
        648:2  3 (%test-on-test-begin #<test-runner pass-count: 0 fail-count: 0 xpass-count: 0…>)
       266:21  2 (%test-should-execute #<test-runner pass-count: 0 fail-count: 0 xpass-count: …>)
       257:17  1 (%test-any-specifier-matches (1) #<test-runner pass-count: 0 fail-count: 0 xp…>)
       257:17  0 (%test-any-specifier-matches #<test-runner pass-count: 0 fail-count: 0 xpass…> …)

    srfi/srfi-64/testing.scm:257:17: In procedure %test-any-specifier-matches:
    Wrong type to apply: 1

The string variant is also not supported, as in:

    (use-modules (srfi srfi-64))
    (test-apply "t-a" (λ () (test-assert #t)))

Resulting in:

    [..]
    srfi/srfi-64/testing.scm:257:17: In procedure %test-any-specifier-matches:
    Wrong type to apply: "t-a"

Have a nice day
Tomas Volf

Message #8 received at 72374 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Taylan Kammer <taylan.kammer <at> gmail.com>
To: Tomas Volf <~@wolfsden.cz>, 72374 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#72374: srfi-64: test-apply does not accept convenience
 specifiers
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2024 00:17:01 +0200

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.
> The specifiers are defined in `Test specifiers' section:
>
>> [..] For convenience, a specifier may also be a non-procedure value, which is
>> coerced to a specifier procedure, as described below for count and name.
> That means that following should work:
>
>     (use-modules (srfi srfi-64))
>     (test-apply 1 (λ () (test-assert #t)))
>
> However it does not:
>
>     Backtrace:
>     In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
>       1752:10 12 (with-exception-handler _ _ #:unwind? _ #:unwind-for-type _)
>     In unknown file:
>               11 (apply-smob/0 #<thunk 7fd0803c7300>)
>     In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
>         724:2 10 (call-with-prompt _ _ #<procedure default-prompt-handler (k proc)>)
>     In ice-9/eval.scm:
>         619:8  9 (_ #(#(#<directory (guile-user) 7fd0803cac80>)))
>     In ice-9/boot-9.scm:
>        2836:4  8 (save-module-excursion _)
>       4388:12  7 (_)
>     In srfi/srfi-64/testing.scm:
>        947:34  6 (test-apply 1 #<procedure 7fd074b30108 at /home/wolf/src/guile-wolfsden/tests…>)
>        944:21  5 (test-apply _ #<procedure 7fd074b30108 at /home/wolf/src/guile-wolfsden/tests…>)
>        688:12  4 (_)
>         648:2  3 (%test-on-test-begin #<test-runner pass-count: 0 fail-count: 0 xpass-count: 0…>)
>        266:21  2 (%test-should-execute #<test-runner pass-count: 0 fail-count: 0 xpass-count: …>)
>        257:17  1 (%test-any-specifier-matches (1) #<test-runner pass-count: 0 fail-count: 0 xp…>)
>        257:17  0 (%test-any-specifier-matches #<test-runner pass-count: 0 fail-count: 0 xpass…> …)
>
>     srfi/srfi-64/testing.scm:257:17: In procedure %test-any-specifier-matches:
>     Wrong type to apply: 1
>
> The string variant is also not supported, as in:
>
>     (use-modules (srfi srfi-64))
>     (test-apply "t-a" (λ () (test-assert #t)))
>
> Resulting in:
>
>     [..]
>     srfi/srfi-64/testing.scm:257:17: In procedure %test-any-specifier-matches:
>     Wrong type to apply: "t-a"
>
> Have a nice day
> Tomas Volf
>
Looks like a bug. Fixed in my implementation via this commit:

    https://codeberg.org/taylan/scheme-srfis/commit/c14388e475dfe6a20cdd090d397813868dee0137

An equivalent fix shouldn't be *too* difficult to implement in the upstream implementation, but I'm not touching the test-apply implementation in there because it's demonic. :-)

If someone wants to try it though, what's called `make-pred` in my code is called `%test-as-specifier` in the upstream code, and just like in my fix it just needs to be applied to the specifiers at some point to make sure they're all procedures.

- Taylan

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.