The MS compiler doesn't call it 'long long', it uses __int64,
so a new #define, LONG_LONG, has been added and all occurrences
of 'long long' are replaced with it.
Previously, this said "unsubscriptable object"; in 1.5.1, the reverse
problem existed, where None[''] would complain about a non-integer
index. This fix does the right thing in all cases (for get, set and
del item).
before calling it. This check was there when the objects were of the
same type *before* coercion, but not if they initially differed but
became the same *after* coercion.
Sparc Solaris 2.6 (fully patched!) that I don't want to dig into, but
which I suspect is a bug in the multithreaded malloc library that only
shows up when run on a multiprocessor. (The program wasn't using
threads, it was just using the multithreaded C library.)
faster (using PyList_GetSlice()). Also added a test for a NULL
argument, as with PySequence_Tuple(). (Hmm... Better names for these
two would be PyList_FromSequence() and PyTuple_FromSequence(). Oh well.)
"indefinite length" sequences. These should still have a length, but
the length is only used as a hint -- the actual length of the sequence
is determined by the item that raises IndexError, which may be either
smaller or larger than what len() returns. (This is a novelty; map(),
filter() and reduce() only allow the actual length to be larger than
what len() returns, not shorter. I'll fix that shortly.)
conversions. Formerly, for example, int('-') would return 0 instead
of raising ValueError, and int(' 0') would raise ValueError
(complaining about a null byte!) instead of 0...
+ Took the "list" argument out of the other functions that no longer need
it. This speeds things up a little more.
+ Small comment changes in accord with that.
+ Exploited the now-safe ability to cache values in the partitioning loop.
Makes no timing difference on my flavor of Pentium, but this machine ran out
of registers 12 iterations ago. It should yield a small speedup on a RISC
machine, and not hurt in any case.
instead of testing whether the list changed size after each
comparison, temporarily set the type of the list to an immutable list
type. This should allow continued use of the list for legitimate
purposes but disallows all operations that can change it in any way.
(Changes to the internals of list items are not caught, of cause;
that's not possible to detect, and it's not necessary to protect the
sort code, either.)
not in restricted mode.
__dict__ can be set to any dictionary; the cl_getattr, cl_setattr and
cl_delattr slots are refreshed.
__name__ can be set to any string.
__bases__ can be set to to a tuple of classes, provided they are not
subclasses of the class whose attribute is being assigned.
__getattr__, __setattr__ and __delattr__ can be set to anything, or
deleted; the appropriate slot (cl_getattr, cl_setattr, cl_delattr) is
refreshed.
(Note: __name__ really doesn't need to be a special attribute, but
that would be more work.)
From: "Tim Peters" <tim_one@email.msn.com>
To: "Guido van Rossum" <guido@CNRI.Reston.VA.US>
Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 21:45:53 -0400
Guido, the overflow checking in PyLong_AsLong is off a little:
1) If the C in use sign-extends right shifts on signed longs, there's a
spurious overflow error when converting the most-negative int:
Python 1.5.1 (#0, Apr 13 1998, 20:22:04) [MSC 32 bit (Intel)] on win32
Copyright 1991-1995 Stichting Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam
>>> x = -1L << 31
>>> x
-2147483648L
>>> int(x)
Traceback (innermost last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in ?
OverflowError: long int too long to convert
>>>
2) If C does not sign-extend, some genuine overflows won't be caught.
The attached should repair both, and, because I installed a new disk and a C
compiler today, it's even been compiled this time <wink>.
Python 1.5.1 (#0, May 23 1998, 20:24:58) [MSC 32 bit (Intel)] on win32
Copyright 1991-1995 Stichting Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam
>>> x = -1L << 31
>>> x
-2147483648L
>>> int(x)
-2147483648
>>> int(-x)
Traceback (innermost last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in ?
OverflowError: long int too long to convert
>>> int(-x-1)
2147483647
>>> int(x-1)
Traceback (innermost last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in ?
OverflowError: long int too long to convert
>>>
end-casing-ly y'rs - tim
Make sure that no tp_as_numbers->nb_<whatever> function is called
without checking for a NULL pointer. Marc-Andre Lemburg will love it!
(Except that he's just rewritten all this code for a different
approach to coercions ;-( )
