On 5/31/10 1:17 AM, Olive wrote:
> On Sun, 30 May 2010 09:45:24 -0400
> Raymond Toy <toy.raymond at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> On 5/30/10 1:45 AM, Olive wrote:
>>
>>> I'm trying to use maxima (5.21.1) with cmucl. I've tried 20a and 19f
>>> (using binaries from the cmucl page) but although maxima builds, it
>>> does not pass the test suite (I do not remember the errors, it
>>> varies according to the lisp version, but I could reproduce it if
>>> necessary). Are these errors known? Does someone know if there is a
>>> specific version I have to use?
>>>
>>>
>> I have regularly used 19f and 20a (but not recently). AFAIK, cmucl
>> works very well with maxima. I currently use the 2010-05 snapshot of
>> cmucl with maxima. If you could send information about the failed
>> tests and the version, I'm sure we can figure out what is going on.
>>
> Here is the output of the tests with cmucl 20a (using the official
> binary cmucl-20a-non-unicode-x86-linux.tar.bz2 and
> cmucl-20a-non-unicode-x86-linux.extra.tar.bz2) and maxima 5.21.1
> (compiled from source) (I had less errors with cmucl 19f but there was).
>
Thanks for the test results. Some of the failures in rtest14 look
strange. I don't remember seeing anything like that. I'll have to try
this with 20a and 5.21.1, and the non-unicode version. (I normally use
the unicode version.)
The ones in rtest_gamma look somewhat familiar. Can you tell me if you
were running the tests using the sse2 version of cmucl? (Just start up
cmucl and look to see what core is being used. If it's lisp-sse2.core,
then you're using the sse2 version). If you are, there are known bugs
in arithmetic in the sse2 version. These were fixed in the 2009-11 and
2010-04 snapshots. If you don't mind, could you try again with the
latest (2010-06) snapshot from common-lisp.net?
Ray