Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

test bf_utm ... FAILED #30

Open
io12 opened this issue Mar 31, 2020 · 2 comments
Open

test bf_utm ... FAILED #30

io12 opened this issue Mar 31, 2020 · 2 comments
Labels

Comments

@io12
Copy link

io12 commented Mar 31, 2020

Output with RUST_BACKTRACE=1 cargo test:

---- bf_utm stdout ----
thread 'bf_utm' panicked at 'called `Result::unwrap()` on an `Err` value: CycleLimit', tests/lib.rs:40:1
stack backtrace:
   0: <std::sys_common::backtrace::_print::DisplayBacktrace as core::fmt::Display>::fmt
   1: core::fmt::write
   2: std::io::Write::write_fmt
   3: std::io::impls::<impl std::io::Write for alloc::boxed::Box<W>>::write_fmt
   4: std::panicking::default_hook::{{closure}}
   5: std::panicking::default_hook
   6: std::panicking::rust_panic_with_hook
   7: rust_begin_unwind
   8: core::panicking::panic_fmt
   9: core::option::expect_none_failed
  10: core::result::Result<T,E>::unwrap
             at /build/rust/src/rustc-1.42.0-src/src/libcore/result.rs:963
  11: lib::bf_utm
             at tests/lib.rs:12
  12: lib::bf_utm::{{closure}}
             at tests/lib.rs:10
  13: core::ops::function::FnOnce::call_once
             at /build/rust/src/rustc-1.42.0-src/src/libcore/ops/function.rs:232
  14: <alloc::boxed::Box<F> as core::ops::function::FnOnce<A>>::call_once
  15: __rust_maybe_catch_panic
  16: test::run_test::run_test_inner::{{closure}}
note: Some details are omitted, run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=full` for a verbose backtrace.
@nixpulvis
Copy link
Owner

Yep, this is a known issue. In fact, running cargo test currently, this is the only failing test.

I haven't taken the time to dig more into it however, but thanks for opening an issue about it.

@nixpulvis nixpulvis added the bug label Apr 2, 2020
@rdebath
Copy link

rdebath commented Jun 16, 2020

It seems to work fine if you provide a Turing machine as input (for example below) and increase the cycle limit over 18_827_260 (for that example).

So this is a bug in the test not the interpreter.

b1b11111111111111111bbb1b1bb11111111111111111bb111111b1b111111111111111111111bb1bb11111111111bb11111111111111111bb1111111111111111b11111111111c1c1

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants