hack, and it's even more disgusting than a PyInstance_Check() call.
If the tp_compare slot is the slot used for overrides in Python,
it's always called.
Add some tests that show what should work too.
#462270: sub-tle difference between pre.sub and sre.sub. PRE ignored
an empty match at the previous location, SRE didn't.
also synced with Secret Labs "sreopen" codebase.
to raise TypeError. In practice, a disallowed attribute assignment
can raise either TypeError or AttributeError (and it's unclear which
is better). So allow either. (Yes, this is in anticipation of a
code change that switches the exception raised. :-)
- Add a utility function, cantset(), which verifies that setting a
particular attribute to a given value is disallowed, and also that
deleting that same attribute is disallowed. Use this in the
test_func_*() tests.
- Add a new set of tests that test conformance of various instance
method attributes. (Also in anticipation of code that changes their
implementation.)
and are lists, and then just the string elements (if any)).
There are good and bad reasons for this. The good reason is to support
dir() "like before" on objects of extension types that haven't migrated
to the class introspection API yet. The bad reason is that Python's own
method objects are such a type, and this is the quickest way to get their
im_self etc attrs to "show up" via dir(). It looks much messier to move
them to the new scheme, as their current getattr implementation presents
a view of their attrs that's a untion of their own attrs plus their
im_func's attrs. In particular, methodobject.__dict__ actually returns
methodobject.im_func.__dict__, and if that's important to preserve it
doesn't seem to fit the class introspection model at all.
Both int and long multiplication are changed to be more careful in
their assumptions about when one of the arguments is a sequence: the
assumption that at least one of the arguments must be an int (or long,
respectively) is still held, but the assumption that these don't smell
like sequences is no longer true: a subtype of int or long may well
have a sequence-repeat thingie!
keys are true strings -- no subclasses need apply. This may be debatable.
The problem is that a str subclass may very well want to override __eq__
and/or __hash__ (see the new example of case-insensitive strings in
test_descr), but go-fast shortcuts for strings are ubiquitous in our dicts
(and subclass overrides aren't even looked for then). Another go-fast
reason for the change is that PyCheck_StringExact() is a quicker test
than PyCheck_String(), and we make such a test on virtually every access
to every dict.
OTOH, a str subclass may also be perfectly happy using the base str eq
and hash, and this change slows them a lot. But those cases are still
hypothetical, while Python's own reliance on true-string dicts is not.
just by doing type(f) where f is any file object. This left a hole in
restricted execution mode that rexec.py can't plug by itself (although it
can plug part of it; the rest is plugged in fileobject.c now).
on to the tp_new slot (if non-NULL), as well as to the tp_init slot (if
any). A sane type implementing both tp_new and tp_init should probably
pay attention to the arguments in only one of them.
with the same value instead. This ensures that a string (or string
subclass) object's ob_sinterned pointer is always a str (or NULL), and
that the dict of interned strings only has strs as keys.
+ These were leaving the hash fields at 0, which all string and unicode
routines believe is a legitimate hash code. As a result, hash() applied
to str and unicode subclass instances always returned 0, which in turn
confused dict operations, etc.
+ Changed local names "new"; no point to antagonizing C++ compilers.
subclasses, all "the usual" ones (slicing etc), plus replace, translate,
ljust, rjust, center and strip. I don't know how to be sure they've all
been caught.
Question: Should we complain if someone tries to intern an instance of
a string subclass? I hate to slow any code on those paths.
tuple(i) repaired to return a true tuple when i is an instance of a
tuple subclass.
Added PyTuple_CheckExact macro.
PySequence_Tuple(): if a tuple-like object isn't exactly a tuple, it's
not safe to return the object as-is -- make a new tuple of it instead.
Given an immutable type M, and an instance I of a subclass of M, the
constructor call M(I) was just returning I as-is; but it should return a
new instance of M. This fixes it for M in {int, long}. Strings, floats
and tuples remain to be done.
Added new macros PyInt_CheckExact and PyLong_CheckExact, to more easily
distinguish between "is" and "is a" (i.e., only an int passes
PyInt_CheckExact, while any sublass of int passes PyInt_Check).
Added private API function _PyLong_Copy.
If on Windows, we require the 'largefile' resource.
If not on Windows, we use a test that actually writes a byte beyond
the 2BG limit -- seeking alone is not sufficient, since on some
systems (e.g. Linux with glibc 2.2) the sytem call interface supports
large seek offsets but not all filesystem implementations do.
Note that on Windows, we do not use the write test: on Win2K, that
test can take a minute trying to zero all those blocks on disk, and on
Windows our code always supports large seek offsets (but again, not
all filesystems do). This may mean that on Win95, or on certain other
backward filesystems, test_largefile will *fail*.
horridly inefficient hack in regrtest's Compare class, but it's about as
clean as can be: regrtest has to set up the Compare instance before
importing a test module, and by the time the module *is* imported it's too
late to change that decision. The good news is that the more tests we
convert to unittest and doctest, the less the inefficiency here matters.
Even now there are few tests with large expected-output files (the new
cost here is a Python-level call per .write() when there's an expected-
output file).
iterable object. I'm not sure how that got overlooked before!
Got rid of the internal _PySequence_IterContains, introduced a new
internal _PySequence_IterSearch, and rewrote all the iteration-based
"count of", "index of", and "is the object in it or not?" routines to
just call the new function. I suppose it's slower this way, but the
code duplication was getting depressing.
saving instead a traceback string, but test_support's run_unittest was
still peeking into unittest internals and trying to pick apart unittest's
errors and failures vectors as if they contained exc_info() tuples instead
of strings.
Whatever, when a unittest-based test failed, test_support blew up. I'm
not sure this is the right way to fix it; it simply gets me unstuck.
capabilities of the Pentium FPU, so what should have been (and were on
Windows) exact results got fuzzy. Then it turns out test_support.fcmp()
isn't tolerant of tiny errors when *one* of the comparands is 0, but
test_complex's old check_close_real() is. Rather than fix gcc <wink>,
easier to revert this test and revisit after the release.
(1) Allow multiple -u options to extend each other (and the initial
value of use_resources passed into regrtest.main()).
(2) When a test is run stand-alone (not via regrtest.py), needed
resources are always granted.
1. That seeking beyond the end of a file increases the size of a file.
2. That files so extended are magically filled with null bytes.
I find no support for either in the C std, and #2 in particular turns out
not to be true on Win32 (you apparently see whatever trash happened to be
on disk). Left #1 intact, but changed the test to check only bytes it
explicitly wrote. Also fiddled the "expected" vs "got" failure reports
to consistently use repr (%r) -- they weren't readable otherwise.
Curious: the MS docs say stati64 etc are supported even on Win95, but
Win95 doesn't support a filesystem that allows partitions > 2 Gb.
test_largefile: This was opening its test file in text mode. I have no
idea how that worked under Win64, but it sure needs binary mode on Win98.
BTW, on Win98 test_largefile runs quickly (under a second).
requires that errno ever get set, and it looks like glibc is already
playing that game. New rules:
+ Never use HUGE_VAL. Use the new Py_HUGE_VAL instead.
+ Never believe errno. If overflow is the only thing you're interested in,
use the new Py_OVERFLOWED(x) macro. If you're interested in any libm
errors, use the new Py_SET_ERANGE_IF_OVERFLOW(x) macro, which attempts
to set errno the way C89 said it worked.
Unfortunately, none of these are reliable, but they work on Windows and I
*expect* under glibc too.
32 characters per component. This makes mkdir() calls and such fail with EINVAL.
For now I am disabling the test on the Mac, and I'll open a bugreport.
getting Infs, NaNs, or nonsense in 2.1 and before; in yesterday's CVS we
were getting OverflowError; but these functions always make good sense
for positive arguments, no matter how large).
"/" and "//", and doesn't really care what they *mean*, just that both
are tried (and that, whatever they mean, they act similarly for int and
long arguments).
the fiddling is simply due to that no caller of PyLong_AsDouble ever
checked for failure (so that's fixing old bugs). PyLong_AsDouble is much
faster for big inputs now too, but that's more of a happy consequence
than a design goal.
of PyMapping_Keys because we know we have a real dict. Tolerate that
objects may have an attr named "__dict__" that's not a dict (Py_None
popped up during testing).
test_descr.py, test_dir(): Test the new classic-class behavior; beef up
the new-style class test similarly.
test_pyclbr.py, checkModule(): dir(C) is no longer a synonym for
C.__dict__.keys() when C is a classic class (looks like the same thing
that burned distutils! -- should it be *made* a synoym again? Then it
would be inconsistent with new-style class behavior.).
bag. It's clearly wrong for classic classes, at heart because a classic
class doesn't have a __class__ attribute, and I'm unclear on whether
that's feature or bug. I'll repair this once I find out (in the
meantime, dir() applied to classic classes won't find the base classes,
while dir() applied to a classic-class instance *will* find the base
classes but not *their* base classes).
Please give the new dir() a try and see whether you love it or hate it.
The new dir([]) behavior is something I could come to love. Here's
something to hate:
>>> class C:
... pass
...
>>> c = C()
>>> dir(c)
['__doc__', '__module__']
>>>
The idea that an instance has a __doc__ attribute is jarring (of course
it's really c.__class__.__doc__ == C.__doc__; likewise for __module__).
OTOH, the code already has too many special cases, and dir(x) doesn't
have a compelling or clear purpose when x isn't a module.
mapping object", in the same sense dict.update(x) requires of x (that x
has a keys() method and a getitem).
Questionable: The other type constructors accept a keyword argument, so I
did that here too (e.g., dictionary(mapping={1:2}) works). But type_call
doesn't pass the keyword args to the tp_new slot (it passes NULL), it only
passes them to the tp_init slot, so getting at them required adding a
tp_init slot to dicts. Looks like that makes the normal case (i.e., no
args at all) a little slower (the time it takes to call dict.tp_init and
have it figure out there's nothing to do).
64-bit INTs on 32-bit boxes (where they become longs). Also exploit that
int(str) and long(str) will ignore a trailing newline (saves creating a
new string at the Python level).
pickletester.py: Simulate reading a pickle produced by a 64-bit box.
Guido van Rossum
Fredrik Lundh
Tim Peters
Jeremy Hylton
Fred Drake
Jack Jansen
Martin v. Löwis
Barry Warsaw