Re: [Axiom-developer] Re: concatenate and bit-vector

[Gabriel Dos Reis]

Stephen Wilson <address@hidden> writes:

| Gabriel Dos Reis <address@hidden> writes:
| 
| > On Thu, 9 Aug 2007, address@hidden wrote:
| > 
| > | Steve, Gaby,
| > | 
| > | The semantics of concat are those of vmlisp.
| > | 
| > | It might be possible to prove that concat is never called with
| > | bit-vector semantics. The subtle part is to prove that it can't
| > | occur in generated code (e.g. algebra).
| > 
| > I'm sorry but that is nonsense to me.  
| > 
| > You clearly have a buggy codes, but you're unwilling to fix, invoking 
twisted
| > logic.  
| > 
| > That concat has two version.  One for AKCL, one for non-AKCL.
| > The only way its call can always yield meaningful results is that the
| > arguments satisfy the common semantics restrictions, which is that
| > the arguments be of type string.  That is all you need to know to fix your
| > code. 
| 
| I agree that 'concat is a bit wierd, an I would like it to be a little
| more general, but I still dont understand what is broken about it.
| 
| One gets the same results for each version of concat, under GCl or
| SBCL as appropriate.
| 
|   (concat "foo" #\-  'bar) ==> "FOO-BAR"


Now, I understand what is wrong with my version and your version.
The version in trunk calls STRING on all arguments before calling
concatenate.  

The version I'm working with does not call STRING on the arguments.
That is where the difference come from.

So the original bug in 

   (test Rule1)

can be fixed either:

   1.  (test 'Rule1)
   2.  (test "RULE1")

It is Tim's call.  



-- Gaby