>> What are pseudo-namestrings? > this is your term from earlier mail: Oh, OK.
> in a separate message, you indicated that a complete absolute > pathname namestring should also appear in some test. > Yes, although that would probably only work on Unix, so should be made #+unix or some such. >> What are homogeneous failures? > > configurations which are either all logical pathnames or include no > logical pathname.[1] > at one point, i thought that might (inversely) correlate with > failure, but that appears to not be the case. > At least I'm glad that SBCL, CCL and LispWorks pass all tests. There is *some* sanity in the world. >> I have the hardest time debugging the least failure with CLISP. > > i have yet to try to understand the causes for anything but the most > basic errors. > i would like to hear first, whether the test configurations are > correct and/or complete. > Correct, they look like they are. Complete, I'll have to think way more, but I suppose you could add an untype static file just for kicks. [ François-René ÐVB Rideau | Reflection&Cybernethics | http://fare.tunes.org ] The penalty for laughing in a courtroom is six months in jail; if it were not for this penalty, the jury would never hear the evidence. — H. L. Mencken _______________________________________________ asdf-devel mailing list asdf-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asdf-devel
