GNU bug report logs - #21181
SRFI-64: Possible bug in test-group

Previous Next

Package: guile;

Reported by: Rob Browning <rlb <at> defaultvalue.org>

Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2015 03:28:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Done: Rob Browning <rlb <at> defaultvalue.org>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 21181 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 21181 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

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

View this report as an mbox folder, status mbox, maintainer mbox

Report forwarded to bug-guile <at> gnu.org:
bug#21181; Package guile. (Mon, 03 Aug 2015 03:28:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.
Acknowledgement sent to Rob Browning <rlb <at> defaultvalue.org>:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to bug-guile <at> gnu.org. (Mon, 03 Aug 2015 03:28:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

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

From: Rob Browning <rlb <at> defaultvalue.org>
To: bug-guile <at> gnu.org
Subject: Possible bug in test-group
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2015 22:27:34 -0500

With 2.0.11(-deb+1-9):

  scheme@(guile-user)> (use-modules (srfi srfi-64))
  scheme@(guile-user)> (test-group "foo" 13)
  <unnamed port>:2:0: In procedure #<procedure 1ca9e80 at <current input>:2:0 ()>:
  <unnamed port>:2:0: In procedure struct_vtable: Wrong type argument in position 1 (expecting struct): #f

Changing the syntax-case to use "body ..." instead of ". body" appears
to fix the problem.

Thanks
-- 
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org
GPG as of 2011-07-10 E6A9 DA3C C9FD 1FF8 C676 D2C4 C0F0 39E9 ED1B 597A
GPG as of 2002-11-03 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592 F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4
Information forwarded to bug-guile <at> gnu.org:
bug#21181; Package guile. (Mon, 03 Aug 2015 03:35:01 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #8 received at 21181 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Rob Browning <rlb <at> defaultvalue.org>
To: 21181 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#21181: Possible bug in test-group
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2015 22:34:52 -0500

Rob Browning <rlb <at> defaultvalue.org> writes:

> With 2.0.11(-deb+1-9):
>
>   scheme@(guile-user)> (use-modules (srfi srfi-64))
>   scheme@(guile-user)> (test-group "foo" 13)
>   <unnamed port>:2:0: In procedure #<procedure 1ca9e80 at <current input>:2:0 ()>:
>   <unnamed port>:2:0: In procedure struct_vtable: Wrong type argument in position 1 (expecting struct): #f
>
> Changing the syntax-case to use "body ..." instead of ". body" appears
> to fix the problem.

Hmm, this may be a local issue.  Feel free to ignore it for now.

Thanks
-- 
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org
GPG as of 2011-07-10 E6A9 DA3C C9FD 1FF8 C676 D2C4 C0F0 39E9 ED1B 597A
GPG as of 2002-11-03 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592 F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4
Information forwarded to bug-guile <at> gnu.org:
bug#21181; Package guile. (Mon, 03 Aug 2015 03:44:01 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #11 received at 21181 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Rob Browning <rlb <at> defaultvalue.org>
To: 21181 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#21181: Possible bug in test-group
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2015 22:43:34 -0500

Rob Browning <rlb <at> defaultvalue.org> writes:

> Rob Browning <rlb <at> defaultvalue.org> writes:
>
>> With 2.0.11(-deb+1-9):
>>
>>   scheme@(guile-user)> (use-modules (srfi srfi-64))
>>   scheme@(guile-user)> (test-group "foo" 13)
>>   <unnamed port>:2:0: In procedure #<procedure 1ca9e80 at <current input>:2:0 ()>:
>>   <unnamed port>:2:0: In procedure struct_vtable: Wrong type argument in position 1 (expecting struct): #f
>>
>> Changing the syntax-case to use "body ..." instead of ". body" appears
>> to fix the problem.
>
> Hmm, this may be a local issue.  Feel free to ignore it for now.

To follow up, it does look like it might be broken, but you can ignore
my suggested fix.

Thanks
-- 
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org
GPG as of 2011-07-10 E6A9 DA3C C9FD 1FF8 C676 D2C4 C0F0 39E9 ED1B 597A
GPG as of 2002-11-03 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592 F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4
Information forwarded to bug-guile <at> gnu.org:
bug#21181; Package guile. (Mon, 03 Aug 2015 04:30:04 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #14 received at 21181 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Rob Browning <rlb <at> defaultvalue.org>
To: 21181 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#21181: Possible bug in test-group
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2015 23:29:25 -0500

Rob Browning <rlb <at> defaultvalue.org> writes:

> To follow up, it does look like it might be broken, but you can ignore
> my suggested fix.

I'm not that familiar with srfi-64, but it looks like the problem (if
it's not expected) is that test-group doesn't handle the case where it's
creating the first group, i.e. no prior test-begin.

In that situation it appears that test-runner-current returns #f,
causing test-result-alist! to fail.

Hope this helps
-- 
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org
GPG as of 2011-07-10 E6A9 DA3C C9FD 1FF8 C676 D2C4 C0F0 39E9 ED1B 597A
GPG as of 2002-11-03 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592 F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4
Changed bug title to 'SRFI-64: Possible bug in test-group' from 'Possible bug in test-group' Request was from ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org. (Thu, 29 Oct 2015 22:51:01 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.
Information forwarded to bug-guile <at> gnu.org:
bug#21181; Package guile. (Fri, 24 Jun 2016 08:29:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #19 received at 21181 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>
To: mhw <at> netris.org
Cc: 21181 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Rob Browning <rlb <at> defaultvalue.org>
Subject: Re: bug#21181: Possible bug in test-group
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 10:28:22 +0200

Mark, do you have any thoughts on this one?

A

On Mon 03 Aug 2015 06:29, Rob Browning <rlb <at> defaultvalue.org> writes:

> Rob Browning <rlb <at> defaultvalue.org> writes:
>
>> To follow up, it does look like it might be broken, but you can ignore
>> my suggested fix.
>
> I'm not that familiar with srfi-64, but it looks like the problem (if
> it's not expected) is that test-group doesn't handle the case where it's
> creating the first group, i.e. no prior test-begin.
>
> In that situation it appears that test-runner-current returns #f,
> causing test-result-alist! to fail.
>
> Hope this helps
Reply sent to Rob Browning <rlb <at> defaultvalue.org>:
You have taken responsibility. (Sun, 12 Jan 2025 19:56:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.
Notification sent to Rob Browning <rlb <at> defaultvalue.org>:
bug acknowledged by developer. (Sun, 12 Jan 2025 19:56:03 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #24 received at 21181-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Rob Browning <rlb <at> defaultvalue.org>
To: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>
Cc: 21181-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#21181: SRFI-64: Possible bug in test-group
Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2025 13:55:24 -0600

Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com> writes:

> On Mon 03 Aug 2015 06:29, Rob Browning <rlb <at> defaultvalue.org> writes:

>> I'm not that familiar with srfi-64, but it looks like the problem (if
>> it's not expected) is that test-group doesn't handle the case where it's
>> creating the first group, i.e. no prior test-begin.

> Mark, do you have any thoughts on this one?

This appears to be fixed in at least main, presumably by the recent
srfi-64 work.

Thanks
-- 
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org
GPG as of 2011-07-10 E6A9 DA3C C9FD 1FF8 C676 D2C4 C0F0 39E9 ED1B 597A
GPG as of 2002-11-03 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592 F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4
bug archived. Request was from Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org> to internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org. (Mon, 10 Feb 2025 12:24:13 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.
This bug report was last modified 31 days ago.

Previous Next

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