dis(): Not all opcodes are printable anymore, so print the repr

of the opcode character instead (but stripping the quotes).

Added a proto 2 test section for the canonical recursive-tuple case.
Note that since pickle's save_tuple() takes different paths depending on
tuple length now, beefier tests are really needed (but not in pickletools);
the "short tuple" case tried here was actually broken yesterday, and it's
subtle stuff so needs to be tested.
This commit is contained in:
Tim Peters 2003-01-28 15:27:57 +00:00
parent 1be3175992
commit d0f7c86a20
1 changed files with 150 additions and 126 deletions

View File

@ -1874,9 +1874,9 @@ def dis(pickle, out=None, indentlevel=4):
if pos is not None:
print >> out, "%5d:" % pos,
line = "%s %s%s" % (opcode.code,
indentchunk * len(markstack),
opcode.name)
line = "%-4s %s%s" % (repr(opcode.code)[1:-1],
indentchunk * len(markstack),
opcode.name)
markmsg = None
if markstack and markobject in opcode.stack_before:
@ -1904,103 +1904,103 @@ _dis_test = """
>>> x = [1, 2, (3, 4), {'abc': u"def"}]
>>> pkl = pickle.dumps(x, 0)
>>> dis(pkl)
0: ( MARK
1: l LIST (MARK at 0)
2: p PUT 0
5: I INT 1
8: a APPEND
9: I INT 2
12: a APPEND
13: ( MARK
14: I INT 3
17: I INT 4
20: t TUPLE (MARK at 13)
21: p PUT 1
24: a APPEND
25: ( MARK
26: d DICT (MARK at 25)
27: p PUT 2
30: S STRING 'abc'
37: p PUT 3
40: V UNICODE u'def'
45: p PUT 4
48: s SETITEM
49: a APPEND
50: . STOP
0: ( MARK
1: l LIST (MARK at 0)
2: p PUT 0
5: I INT 1
8: a APPEND
9: I INT 2
12: a APPEND
13: ( MARK
14: I INT 3
17: I INT 4
20: t TUPLE (MARK at 13)
21: p PUT 1
24: a APPEND
25: ( MARK
26: d DICT (MARK at 25)
27: p PUT 2
30: S STRING 'abc'
37: p PUT 3
40: V UNICODE u'def'
45: p PUT 4
48: s SETITEM
49: a APPEND
50: . STOP
Try again with a "binary" pickle.
>>> pkl = pickle.dumps(x, 1)
>>> dis(pkl)
0: ] EMPTY_LIST
1: q BINPUT 0
3: ( MARK
4: K BININT1 1
6: K BININT1 2
8: ( MARK
9: K BININT1 3
11: K BININT1 4
13: t TUPLE (MARK at 8)
14: q BINPUT 1
16: } EMPTY_DICT
17: q BINPUT 2
19: U SHORT_BINSTRING 'abc'
24: q BINPUT 3
26: X BINUNICODE u'def'
34: q BINPUT 4
36: s SETITEM
37: e APPENDS (MARK at 3)
38: . STOP
0: ] EMPTY_LIST
1: q BINPUT 0
3: ( MARK
4: K BININT1 1
6: K BININT1 2
8: ( MARK
9: K BININT1 3
11: K BININT1 4
13: t TUPLE (MARK at 8)
14: q BINPUT 1
16: } EMPTY_DICT
17: q BINPUT 2
19: U SHORT_BINSTRING 'abc'
24: q BINPUT 3
26: X BINUNICODE u'def'
34: q BINPUT 4
36: s SETITEM
37: e APPENDS (MARK at 3)
38: . STOP
Exercise the INST/OBJ/BUILD family.
>>> import random
>>> dis(pickle.dumps(random.random, 0))
0: c GLOBAL 'random random'
15: p PUT 0
18: . STOP
0: c GLOBAL 'random random'
15: p PUT 0
18: . STOP
>>> x = [pickle.PicklingError()] * 2
>>> dis(pickle.dumps(x, 0))
0: ( MARK
1: l LIST (MARK at 0)
2: p PUT 0
5: ( MARK
6: i INST 'pickle PicklingError' (MARK at 5)
28: p PUT 1
31: ( MARK
32: d DICT (MARK at 31)
33: p PUT 2
36: S STRING 'args'
44: p PUT 3
47: ( MARK
48: t TUPLE (MARK at 47)
49: s SETITEM
50: b BUILD
51: a APPEND
52: g GET 1
55: a APPEND
56: . STOP
0: ( MARK
1: l LIST (MARK at 0)
2: p PUT 0
5: ( MARK
6: i INST 'pickle PicklingError' (MARK at 5)
28: p PUT 1
31: ( MARK
32: d DICT (MARK at 31)
33: p PUT 2
36: S STRING 'args'
44: p PUT 3
47: ( MARK
48: t TUPLE (MARK at 47)
49: s SETITEM
50: b BUILD
51: a APPEND
52: g GET 1
55: a APPEND
56: . STOP
>>> dis(pickle.dumps(x, 1))
0: ] EMPTY_LIST
1: q BINPUT 0
3: ( MARK
4: ( MARK
5: c GLOBAL 'pickle PicklingError'
27: q BINPUT 1
29: o OBJ (MARK at 4)
30: q BINPUT 2
32: } EMPTY_DICT
33: q BINPUT 3
35: U SHORT_BINSTRING 'args'
41: q BINPUT 4
43: ) EMPTY_TUPLE
44: s SETITEM
45: b BUILD
46: h BINGET 2
48: e APPENDS (MARK at 3)
49: . STOP
0: ] EMPTY_LIST
1: q BINPUT 0
3: ( MARK
4: ( MARK
5: c GLOBAL 'pickle PicklingError'
27: q BINPUT 1
29: o OBJ (MARK at 4)
30: q BINPUT 2
32: } EMPTY_DICT
33: q BINPUT 3
35: U SHORT_BINSTRING 'args'
41: q BINPUT 4
43: ) EMPTY_TUPLE
44: s SETITEM
45: b BUILD
46: h BINGET 2
48: e APPENDS (MARK at 3)
49: . STOP
Try "the canonical" recursive-object test.
@ -2016,24 +2016,24 @@ True
>>> T[0][0] is T
True
>>> dis(pickle.dumps(L, 0))
0: ( MARK
1: l LIST (MARK at 0)
2: p PUT 0
5: ( MARK
6: g GET 0
9: t TUPLE (MARK at 5)
10: p PUT 1
13: a APPEND
14: . STOP
0: ( MARK
1: l LIST (MARK at 0)
2: p PUT 0
5: ( MARK
6: g GET 0
9: t TUPLE (MARK at 5)
10: p PUT 1
13: a APPEND
14: . STOP
>>> dis(pickle.dumps(L, 1))
0: ] EMPTY_LIST
1: q BINPUT 0
3: ( MARK
4: h BINGET 0
6: t TUPLE (MARK at 3)
7: q BINPUT 1
9: a APPEND
10: . STOP
0: ] EMPTY_LIST
1: q BINPUT 0
3: ( MARK
4: h BINGET 0
6: t TUPLE (MARK at 3)
7: q BINPUT 1
9: a APPEND
10: . STOP
The protocol 0 pickle of the tuple causes the disassembly to get confused,
as it doesn't realize that the POP opcode at 16 gets rid of the MARK at 0
@ -2043,31 +2043,55 @@ POP_MARK gets rid of the MARK. Doing a better job on the protocol 0
pickle would require the disassembler to emulate the stack.
>>> dis(pickle.dumps(T, 0))
0: ( MARK
1: ( MARK
2: l LIST (MARK at 1)
3: p PUT 0
6: ( MARK
7: g GET 0
10: t TUPLE (MARK at 6)
11: p PUT 1
14: a APPEND
15: 0 POP
16: 0 POP
17: g GET 1
20: . STOP
0: ( MARK
1: ( MARK
2: l LIST (MARK at 1)
3: p PUT 0
6: ( MARK
7: g GET 0
10: t TUPLE (MARK at 6)
11: p PUT 1
14: a APPEND
15: 0 POP
16: 0 POP
17: g GET 1
20: . STOP
>>> dis(pickle.dumps(T, 1))
0: ( MARK
1: ] EMPTY_LIST
2: q BINPUT 0
4: ( MARK
5: h BINGET 0
7: t TUPLE (MARK at 4)
8: q BINPUT 1
10: a APPEND
11: 1 POP_MARK (MARK at 0)
12: h BINGET 1
14: . STOP
0: ( MARK
1: ] EMPTY_LIST
2: q BINPUT 0
4: ( MARK
5: h BINGET 0
7: t TUPLE (MARK at 4)
8: q BINPUT 1
10: a APPEND
11: 1 POP_MARK (MARK at 0)
12: h BINGET 1
14: . STOP
Try protocol 2.
>>> dis(pickle.dumps(L, 2))
0: \x80 PROTO 2
2: ] EMPTY_LIST
3: q BINPUT 0
5: h BINGET 0
7: \x85 TUPLE1
8: q BINPUT 1
10: a APPEND
11: . STOP
>>> dis(pickle.dumps(T, 2))
0: \x80 PROTO 2
2: ] EMPTY_LIST
3: q BINPUT 0
5: h BINGET 0
7: \x85 TUPLE1
8: q BINPUT 1
10: a APPEND
11: 0 POP
12: h BINGET 1
14: . STOP
"""
__test__ = {'disassembler_test': _dis_test,