| msg43415 - (view) |
Author: Gary Herron (herron) |
Date: 2003-04-18 23:15 |
| This patch should reproduce, in the release22-maint branch, an exact copy of the sre code currently in the 2.3 branch, with the single exception of the declaration of the module init function. All future patches should apply cleanly to both 2.3 and 2.2 branches. |
|
|
| msg43416 - (view) |
Author: Guido van Rossum (gvanrossum) *  |
Date: 2003-04-20 20:09 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=6380 Assigning this to Gustavo Niemeyer, who found some problems with this code in 2.3. Gustavo, would you mind working with Gary on backporting this properly? |
|
|
| msg43417 - (view) |
Author: Gustavo Niemeyer (niemeyer) * |
Date: 2003-04-20 21:59 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=7887 No problems. I'll check the patch and workout any issues with Gary. Thanks for pointing me this. |
|
|
| msg43418 - (view) |
Author: Martin v. Löwis (loewis) * |
Date: 2003-04-20 22:00 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=21627 Why does the patch remove partial history? |
|
|
| msg43419 - (view) |
Author: Gary Herron (herron) |
Date: 2003-04-21 01:55 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=395736 Gustavo, If I understand correctly: * The backport to 2.2 done by just copying the code from 2.3 is not the problem, but merely needs to be repeated in light of changes made, by you and Martin, to 2.3 in that last several days. * The "Greg Chapman's patch" you refer to in the checkin comment of revision of 2.91 of _sre.c is from before I came on-board, and is not the MIN_REPEAT_ONE stuff I got from him and gave to Guido to produce revision 2.88. * That previous patch of Greg's (revision 2.84 of _sre.c) caused some bugs (or at least discrepancies) which you have now resolved in the last day or two. * The MIN_REPEAT_ONE stuff of Greg's is not at issue. * The LASTMARK_SAVE()/LASTMARK_RESTORE() calls were added (quite recently) to fix some bugs, and perhaps are needed in other spots if we were to be clever enough (or unlucky enough) to provoke them. |
|
|
| msg43420 - (view) |
Author: Martin v. Löwis (loewis) * |
Date: 2003-04-21 06:57 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=21627 I would be careful with copying changes. In particular, they should not be copied if they are not fully understood. sre is a very delicate library: difficult to understand, easy to break, and, if broken, causing harm to many users. Therefore, I think a strict "bug fixes only" policy should be applied when backporting SRE fixes. Unless there is demonstrated breakage that get fixed by applying a patch, no backport of the patch should be made. By this criterion, my changes to use BIGCHARSET in UCS-4 mode should not be backported, as they don't fix a correctness bug (they do improve performance, but at the cost of changing the SRE bytecode interface) |
|
|
| msg43421 - (view) |
Author: Martin v. Löwis (loewis) * |
Date: 2004-08-29 16:56 |
| Logged In: YES user_id=21627 2.2 is no longer maintained, so I'm rejecting this patch. |
|
|