[Python-Dev] Bad interaction of index and sequence repeat (original) (raw)

Guido van Rossum guido at python.org
Wed Aug 2 19:58:20 CEST 2006

All, please decide without me.

On 8/1/06, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:

Nick Coghlan wrote: > Travis Oliphant wrote: >>> Probably the most interesting thing now would be for Travis to review >>> it, and see whether it makes things easier to handle for the Numeric >>> scalar types (given the amount of code the patch deleted from the >>> builtin and standard library data types, hopefully the benefits to >>> Numeric will be comparable). >> >> I noticed most of the checks for PyInt where removed in the patch. If I >> remember correctly, I left these in for "optimization." Other than >> that, I think the patch is great. > > You're right - there was a fast path based on PyIntCheck in > PyEvalSliceIndex that got lost, which I'll add back in. I'll also add fast > paths for PyIntCheck to the functions in abstract.c, too. > > The other PyIntCheck's (in slotnbindex and instanceindex) were there to > check that index returned the right thing. The check was still there in > slotnbindex, but I'd incorrectly removed it from instanceindex. I'll add > that one back in, too. > > Once that's done, I'll update the tracker item and reassign to Tim for a review.

Aside from the 'assign to Tim' part, this is done now (pep357-fix-v3 on the tracker item). I also tweaked the clipping version of the C API to optionally expose the overflow flag that abstract.c was using internally so the client code can find out whether or not clipping actually occurred. The patch also updates the index unit tests to: - cover the various type errors that Travis picked up - actually run the full set of unit tests under -O - only run the basic sequence independent tests once (instead of once per sequence type) Neal also had a number of questions that I responded to in the tracker comments. The most significant question related to the API signature, which Neal considered potentially confusing: PyNumberIndex(PyObject *item, int *isindex) I added the isindex flag to the function signatures instead of providing a separate PyNumberIndexCheck function in order to avoid doing the same type check twice in the typical mpsubscript implementation cases. One possibility would be to invert the sense of that flag and call it "typeerror", which probably more accurately reflects what it's intended for - it's a way of telling the function "if this object does not have the correct type, tell me by setting this flag instead of by setting the Python error state". Regards, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia --------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.boredomandlaziness.org

Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev at python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/guido%40python.org

-- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list