On Mon 31 Jan 2011 21:30, Mark H Weaver <[email protected]> writes: > Andy Wingo <[email protected]> writes: >> I did apply it, but it made the test cases start to fail, because >> numbers.test is loaded after ecmascript.test, and: >> >> scheme@(guile-user)> ,L ecmascript >> Happy hacking with ECMAScript! To switch back, type `,L scheme'. >> ecmascript@(guile-user)> true * true; >> $1 = 1 >> ecmascript@(guile-user)> ,L scheme >> Happy hacking with Scheme! To switch back, type `,L ecmascript'. >> scheme@(guile-user)> (* #t #t) >> $2 = 1 > > How could changes in `expt' possibly affect (true * true) or (* #t #t)? > I don't understand what this has to do with my patch.
Sorry, I wasn't clear. Your patch replaced a test that expected `(expt #t 0)' to fail with one that expected `(expt #t 2)' to fail. I assumed it was because it was treating `(expt #t 2)' as `(* #t #t)', but I could be mistaken there. You can see this error if you run the full ./check-guile, not just ./check-guile numbers.test. Cheers, Andy -- http://wingolog.org/
