When code is compiled and compiler flags are passed in, be sure to
update cf_flags with any features defined by future statements in the
compiled code.
Revised version of Fred's patch, including support for ~ operator.
If the unary +, -, or ~ operator is applied to a constant, don't
generate a UNARY_xxx opcode. Just store the approriate value as a
constant. If the value is negative, extend the string containing the
constant and insert a negative in the 0th position.
For ~, compute the inverse of int and longs and use them directly, but
be prepared to generate code for all other possibilities (invalid
numbers, floats, complex).
Replace uses of PyCF_xxx with CO_xxx.
Replace individual feature slots in PyFutureFeatures with single
bitmask ff_features.
When flags must be transfered among the three parts of the interpreter
that care about them -- the pythonrun layer, the compiler, and the
future feature parser -- can simply or (|) the definitions.
This introduces:
- A new operator // that means floor division (the kind of division
where 1/2 is 0).
- The "future division" statement ("from __future__ import division)
which changes the meaning of the / operator to implement "true
division" (where 1/2 is 0.5).
- New overloadable operators __truediv__ and __floordiv__.
- New slots in the PyNumberMethods struct for true and floor division,
new abstract APIs for them, new opcodes, and so on.
I emphasize that without the future division statement, the semantics
of / will remain unchanged until Python 3.0.
Not yet implemented are warnings (default off) when / is used with int
or long arguments.
This has been on display since 7/31 as SF patch #443474.
Flames to /dev/null.
that info to code dynamically compiled *by* code compiled with generators
enabled. Doesn't yet work because there's still no way to tell the parser
that "yield" is OK (unlike nested_scopes, the parser has its fingers in
this too).
Replaced PyEval_GetNestedScopes by a more-general
PyEval_MergeCompilerFlags. Perhaps I should not have? I doubted it was
*intended* to be part of the public API, so just did.
"return expr" instances in generators (which latter may be generators
due to otherwise invisible "yield" stmts hiding in "if 0" blocks).
This was fun the first time, but this has gotten truly ugly now.
Iterators list and Python-Dev; e.g., these all pass now:
def g1():
try:
return
except:
yield 1
assert list(g1()) == []
def g2():
try:
return
finally:
yield 1
assert list(g2()) == [1]
def g3():
for i in range(3):
yield None
yield None
assert list(g3()) == [None] * 4
compile.c: compile_funcdef and com_return_stmt: Just van Rossum's patch
to compile the same code for "return" regardless of function type (this
goes back to the previous scheme of returning Py_None).
ceval.c: gen_iternext: take a return (but not a yield) of Py_None as
meaning the generator is exhausted.
Armin Rigo pointed out that the way the line-# table got built didn't work
for lines generating more than 255 bytes of bytecode. Fixed as he
suggested, plus corresponding changes to pyassem.py, plus added some
long overdue docs about this subtle table to compile.c.
Bugfix candidate (line numbers may be off in tracebacks under -O).
Check for free in class and method only if nested scopes are enabled.
Add assertion to verify that no free variables occur when nested
scopes are disabled.
XXX When should nested scopes by made non-optional on the trunk?
The new test case demonstrates the bug. Be more careful in
symtable_resolve_free() to add a var to cells or frees only if it
won't be added under some other rule.
XXX Add new assertion that will catch this bug.
new slot tp_iter in type object, plus new flag Py_TPFLAGS_HAVE_ITER
new C API PyObject_GetIter(), calls tp_iter
new builtin iter(), with two forms: iter(obj), and iter(function, sentinel)
new internal object types iterobject and calliterobject
new exception StopIteration
new opcodes for "for" loops, GET_ITER and FOR_ITER (also supported by dis.py)
new magic number for .pyc files
new special method for instances: __iter__() returns an iterator
iteration over dictionaries: "for x in dict" iterates over the keys
iteration over files: "for x in file" iterates over lines
TODO:
documentation
test suite
decide whether to use a different way to spell iter(function, sentinal)
decide whether "for key in dict" is a good idea
use iterators in map/filter/reduce, min/max, and elsewhere (in/not in?)
speed tuning (make next() a slot tp_next???)
