[gambit-list] Proposed patch

Bradley Lucier lucier at math.purdue.edu
Sat Dec 14 19:29:46 EST 2013


On 12/10/2013 10:27 PM, Marc Feeley wrote:
> Moreover, it is important to check that the primitive functions raise exceptions correctly.  To give you an idea I have added unit tests for fx+ and fl+.  Here's the unit test for fx+:
>
>
> (check-exn type-exception? (lambda () (fx+ 1/2)))
> (check-exn type-exception? (lambda () (fx+ 1/2 9)))
> (check-exn type-exception? (lambda () (fx+ 9 1/2)))
> (check-exn type-exception? (lambda () (fx+ 1/2 3 9)))
> (check-exn type-exception? (lambda () (fx+ 3 1/2 9)))
> (check-exn type-exception? (lambda () (fx+ 3 9 1/2)))
>
> (check-exn fixnum-overflow-exception? (lambda () (fx+ ##max-fixnum 1)))
> (check-exn fixnum-overflow-exception? (lambda () (fx+ ##min-fixnum -1)))

How would one deal with this situation:

    firefly:~/programs/gambit/marc/gambit> gsi
    Gambit v4.7.1

     > (atan +i)
    *** ERROR IN (console)@1.1 -- (Argument 1) Out of range
    (atan +i)
    1>
     > (atan -i)
    *** ERROR IN ##atan -- (Argument 1) Out of range
    (log 0)
    1>


where an "Out of range" exception is raised, but for the wrong function.

Brad
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.iro.umontreal.ca/pipermail/gambit-list/attachments/20131214/33b257c6/attachment.htm>


More information about the Gambit-list mailing list