does not return an iterator for the 4th and 5th items.
(sequence-like and mapping-like state)
A list is not an iterator...
Will backport to 2.6 and 2.5.
behaviours. I left the original test commented out (note
that that test came from #2702, which seems to have a
problem in FreeBSD and Windows, but not in Linux).
I included a new test, to watch over the now-broken
behaviour, I took it from #3179.
Added checks for integer overflows, contributed by Google. Some are
only available if asserts are left in the code, in cases where they
can't be triggered from Python code.
Renamed copy_reg to copyreg in the standard library, to avoid
spurious warnings and ease later merging to py3k branch. Public
documentation remains intact.
This code was broken if save() returned a negative number since i contained
a boolean value and then we compared i < 0 which should never be true.
Will backport (assuming it's necessary)
* unified the way intobject, longobject and mystrtoul handle
values around -sys.maxint-1.
* in general, trying to entierely avoid overflows in any computation
involving signed ints or longs is extremely involved. Fixed a few
simple cases where a compiler might be too clever (but that's all
guesswork).
* more overflow checks against bad data in marshal.c.
* 2.5 specific: fixed a number of places that were still confusing int
and Py_ssize_t. Some of them could potentially have caused
"real-world" breakage.
* list.pop(x): fixing overflow issues on x was messy. I just reverted
to PyArg_ParseTuple("n"), which does the right thing. (An obscure
test was trying to give a Decimal to list.pop()... doesn't make
sense any more IMHO)
* trying to write a few tests...
