revision 2.101 of abstract.c
abstract_get_bases(): Clarify exactly what the return values and
states can be for this function, and ensure that only AttributeErrors
are masked. Any other exception raised via the equivalent of
getattr(cls, '__bases__') should be propagated up.
abstract_issubclass(): If abstract_get_bases() returns NULL, we must
call PyErr_Occurred() to see if an exception is being propagated, and
return -1 or 0 as appropriate. This is the specific fix for a problem
whereby if getattr(derived, '__bases__') raised an exception, an
"undetected error" would occur (under a debug build). This nasty
situation was uncovered when writing a security proxy extension type
for the Zope3 project, where the security proxy raised a Forbidden
exception on getattr of __bases__.
PyObject_IsInstance(), PyObject_IsSubclass(): After both calls to
abstract_get_bases(), where we're setting the TypeError if the return
value is NULL, we must first check to see if an exception occurred,
and /not/ mask an existing exception.
Neil Schemenauer should double check that these changes don't break
his ExtensionClass examples (there aren't any test cases for those
examples and abstract_get_bases() was added by him in response to
problems with ExtensionClass). Neil, please add test cases if
possible!
I belive this is a bug fix candidate for Python 2.2.2.
----
Whitespace normalization made this a pest to backport...
Did a test case ever get added for this?
SF bug 544647.
PyNumber_InPlaceMultiply insisted on calling sq_inplace_repeat if it
existed, even if nb_inplace_multiply also existed and the arguments
weren't right for sq_inplace_repeat. Change this to only use
sq_inplace_repeat if nb_inplace_multiply isn't defined.
Bugfix candidate.
backport jhylton's checkin of
revision 2.98 of abstract.c
Fix leak of NotImplemented in previous checkin to PyNumber_Add().
If result == Py_NotImplemented, always DECREF it before assigning a
new value to result.
revision 2.97 of abstract.c
Fix for SF bug 516727: MyInt(2) + "3" -> NotImplemented
PyNumber_Add() tries the nb_add slot first, then falls back to
sq_concat. However, it didn't check the return value of sq_concat.
If sq_concat returns NotImplemented, raise the standard TypeError.
confusing error messages. If a new-style class has no sequence or
mapping behavior, attempting to use the indexing notation with a
non-integer key would complain that the sequence index must be an
integer, rather than complaining that the operation is not supported.
should just avoid calling it in the first place to avoid waiting for a repr
of a large object like a dict or list. The result of PyObject_Repr() was
being leaked as well.
Bugfix candidate!
the va_list until we are sure we have a format string and need to use it;
this avoid premature initialization and having to finalize it several
different places because of error returns.
PyObject_CallFunctionObArgs() and PyObject_CallMethodObArgs() have the
advantage that no format strings need to be parsed. The CallMethod
variant also avoids creating a new string object in order to retrieve
a method from an object as well.
outer level, the iterator protocol is used for memory-efficiency (the
outer sequence may be very large if fully materialized); at the inner
level, PySequence_Fast() is used for time-efficiency (these should
always be sequences of length 2).
dictobject.c, new functions PyDict_{Merge,Update}FromSeq2. These are
wholly analogous to PyDict_{Merge,Update}, but process a sequence-of-2-
sequences argument instead of a mapping object. For now, I left these
functions file static, so no corresponding doc changes. It's tempting
to change dict.update() to allow a sequence-of-2-seqs argument too.
Also changed the name of dictionary's keyword argument from "mapping"
to "x". Got a better name? "mapping_or_sequence_of_pairs" isn't
attractive, although more so than "mosop" <wink>.
abstract.h, abstract.tex: Added new PySequence_Fast_GET_SIZE function,
much faster than going thru the all-purpose PySequence_Size.
libfuncs.tex:
- Document dictionary().
- Fiddle tuple() and list() to admit that their argument is optional.
- The long-winded repetitions of "a sequence, a container that supports
iteration, or an iterator object" is getting to be a PITA. Many
months ago I suggested factoring this out into "iterable object",
where the definition of that could include being explicit about
generators too (as is, I'm not sure a reader outside of PythonLabs
could guess that "an iterator object" includes a generator call).
- Please check my curly braces -- I'm going blind <0.9 wink>.
abstract.c, PySequence_Tuple(): When PyObject_GetIter() fails, leave
its error msg alone now (the msg it produces has improved since
PySequence_Tuple was generalized to accept iterable objects, and
PySequence_Tuple was also stomping on the msg in cases it shouldn't
have even before PyObject_GetIter grew a better msg).
response to a message by Laura Creighton on c.l.py. E.g.
>>> 0+''
TypeError: unsupported operand types for +: 'int' and 'str'
(previously this did not mention the operand types)
>>> ''+0
TypeError: cannot concatenate 'str' and 'int' objects
isinstance() now allows any object as the first argument and a class, a
type or something with a __bases__ tuple attribute for the second
argument. This closes SF patch #464992.
__rop__ now takes precendence over __op__. Those circumstances are:
- Both arguments are new-style classes
- Both arguments are new-style numbers
- Their implementation slots for tp_op differ
- Their types differ
- The right argument's type is a subtype of the left argument's type
Also did this for the ternary operator (pow) -- only the binary case
is dealt with properly though, since __rpow__ is not supported anyway.
directly, as the only thing done here (replace NULL args with an empty
tuple) is also done there.
XXX Maybe we should take one step further and equate the two at the
macro level? That's harder though because PyEval_Call* is declared in
a header that's not included standard. But it is silly that
PyObject_CallObject calls PyEval_CallObject which calls back to
PyObject_Call. Maybe PyEval_CallObject should be moved into this file
instead? All I know is that there are too many call APIs! The
differences between PyObject_Call and PyEval_CallObjectWithKeywords is
that the latter allows args to be NULL, and does explicit type checks
for args and kwds.
