[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