[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
R5RS compliance test
From: |
Arno Peters |
Subject: |
R5RS compliance test |
Date: |
Fri, 14 Feb 2003 11:17:36 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.3i |
On comp.lang.scheme, Scott Miller published a R5RS compliance test.
The source is here:
http://sisc.sf.net/r5rs_pitfall.scm
The results from other Scheme implementations:
http://sisc.sf.net/r5rspitresults.html
Modifications for Guile:
For obvious reasons, I needed to add
(use-modules (ice-9 syncase))
to the top of r5rs_pitfall.scm
The results for Guile:
I ran the test with Guile1.4 in Debian (unstable). The first run gave
the following resuls:
$ guile -s r5rs_pitfall.scm
Failure: 1.1, expected '0', got '1'.
Passed: 1.2
Passed: 1.3
ERROR: In expression ((quote 0) (c13 #)):
ERROR: Wrong type to apply: 0
After commenting out test 2.1, I got the following results:
$ guile -s r5rs_pitfall.scm
Failure: 1.1, expected '0', got '1'.
Passed: 1.2
Passed: 1.3
Passed: 3.1
Passed: 3.2
Passed: 4.1
Passed: 4.2
Passed: 5.1
Passed: 5.2
Passed: 5.3
Passed: 6.1
Passed: 7.1
Passed: 7.2
Passed: 7.3
Passed: 7.4
Map is not call/cc safe, but probably tail recursive and efficient.
There are two failures: tests 1.1 and 2.1.
I ran the test also with the CVS HEAD branch (1.7.0), again I had to
comment out test 2.1. The test results are identical to guile 1.4
Greetings,
--
Arno Peters
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- R5RS compliance test,
Arno Peters <=