Number: 1807

Date: 10-Aug-84 15':42':37

Submitter: Sannella.PA

Source: Masinter.pa

Subject: ''ufns'' for most of the arith fns changed to have the ''right'' frame name

Assigned To: Masinter.pa

Attn: 

Status: Closed

In/By: Harmony

Problem Type: Design - UI

Impact: Annoying

Difficulty: 

Frequency: 

Priority: Perhaps

System: Language Support

Subsystem: Stack and Interpreter

Machine: 

Disk: 

Lisp Version: 

Source Files: 

Microcode Version: 

Memory Size: 

File Server: 

Server Software Version: 

Disposition: '
["Sannella" "20-Aug-84 19':13':52" Assigned% To': Status':(Fixed->Closed) In/By':]

Description: '
Date': 16 Jul 84 16':07 PDT'
From': Masinter.pa'
Subject': non-numeric args from compiled code'
To': lispcore^'
Reply-to': Masinter.pa'
'
one of the things I changed a while back that I''ve only noticed happening recently is that I changed the ''ufns'' (trap cases) for most of the arithmetic functions to have the ''right'' frame name.'
'
I.e., in compiled code if you call'
(PLUS X Y)'
'
and you run it compiled, and PLUS punts out, it will show up as (PLUS broken) rather than \SLOWPLUS2.'
'
This piece is the result of some trickery': the UFN is not really PLUS but \SLOWPLUS2, but the definition of \SLOWPLUS2 is such that its frame name is PLUS.'
'
I find this quite reasonable and useful in debugging, but it *is* different.'
'
I''ve also been running with (OVERFLOW T) in my init file, and I''ve found a few oddities (including a file that must have been made in Interlisp-10 with (RADIX -8) in 1979, since (OVERFLOW 0) just truncates) but for the most part, I''ve had no problems. We might even be able to encourage users to turn it on!'
'
(CAR/CDRERR is another story, but....)'


Workaround: 

Test Case: 

Edit-By: Sannella

Edit-Date: 20-Aug-84 19':13':52