common-lisp/sbcl.sbcl
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of git://git.code.sf.net/p/sbcl/sbcl synced 2026-09-10 07:26:40 -04:00
Code Issues Actions 8 Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Pick a different package for a package lock test

Browse source 
to see how feasible it is to build without CLOS stream support while
not affecting too many regression tests.
This commit is contained in:
Douglas Katzman 2025-12-04 23:16:57 -05:00
parent e4c0df5b0c
commit f5dc2b9320
1 changed files with 6 additions and 2 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

8
tests/package-locks.impure.lisp
View file

@ -493,12 +493,16 @@
;;;; No bogus violations from defclass with accessors in a locked
;;;; package. Reported by by Francois-Rene Rideau.
;;;; Frankly I think this is the opposite of correct, and that user-extensible
;;;; interfaces don't belong in locked packages, but the design is pretty much
;;;; cast in concrete at this point.
(with-test (:name (defclass :accessor :package-locked))
(assert (package-locked-p :sb-gray))
(assert (sb-pcl::generic-function-p #'sb-impl::inspected-parts))
(assert (package-locked-p :sb-impl))
(let ((fun (checked-compile
'(lambda ()
(defclass fare-class ()
((line-column :initform 0 :reader sb-gray:stream-line-column)))))))
((line-column :initform 0 :reader sb-impl::inspected-parts)))))))
(multiple-value-bind (class run-errors) (ignore-errors (funcall fun))
(assert (not run-errors))
(assert (eq class (find-class 'fare-class))))))