Neal Norwitz wrote:
> I did something similar to what Andrew suggested.
>
> http://python.org/sf/1542451
>
> Could everyone interested take a look and offer more test cases?
>
Note that this needs to be fixed in the compiler package too.
Georg
___
P
I did something similar to what Andrew suggested.
http://python.org/sf/1542451
Could everyone interested take a look and offer more test cases?
n
--
On 8/17/06, A.M. Kuchling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 12:26:33AM +0200, Armin Rigo wrote:
> > Without more inspection, I'd
On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 12:26:33AM +0200, Armin Rigo wrote:
> Without more inspection, I'd say that this looks like it won't do the
> right thing about nested finally's, as in:
I guess it'll have to loop back up through the block stack:
for (j=i- 1; j>=0; j--) {
switch (c->u->u_fblock[j].fb_ty
High-level remark: this seems to need more unit tests. Perhaps TDD
(test-driven design) would be the best approach to obtaining a correct
patch?
--Guido
On 8/17/06, Armin Rigo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Neal,
>
> On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 10:26:09PM -0700, Neal Norwitz wrote:
> > @@ -2367,7 +2
Hi Neal,
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 10:26:09PM -0700, Neal Norwitz wrote:
> @@ -2367,7 +2374,9 @@
> compiler_use_next_block(c, end);
> if (!compiler_push_fblock(c, FINALLY_END, end))
> return 0;
> + c->c_in_finally = 1;
> VISIT_SEQ(c, stmt, s->v.TryFinally.finalbod
On Aug 17, 2006, at 1:26 AM, Neal Norwitz wrote:
> Thanks Dino.
>
> The attached patch should fix the problem. Once RC1 is cut, I'll
> check this in unless someone beats me to it. Since the compiler
> changed, I can't backport this. If someone wants to make a similar
> fix for 2.4 go for it.
Th
Thanks Dino.
The attached patch should fix the problem. Once RC1 is cut, I'll
check this in unless someone beats me to it. Since the compiler
changed, I can't backport this. If someone wants to make a similar
fix for 2.4 go for it.
n
--
On 8/16/06, Dino Viehland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
W
Carlson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 10:11 AM
To: Dino Viehland; python-dev@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] 2.4 & 2.5 beta 3 crash
Dino Viehland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> We've been working on fixing some exception handling bugs in
>
Dino Viehland; python-dev@python.org
Subject: Re: [Python-Dev] 2.4 & 2.5 beta 3 crash
def test():
for abc in range(10):
try: pass
finally:
try:
pass
except:
pass
test()
does not raise a segmentation fault.
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006, Josia
def test():
for abc in range(10):
try: pass
finally:
try:
pass
except:
pass
test()
does not raise a segmentation fault.
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006, Josiah Carlson wrote:
>
> Dino Viehland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > We've been w
Josiah Carlson wrote:
> Dino Viehland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> We've been working on fixing some exception handling bugs in
>> IronPython where we differ from CPython. Along the way we ran into
>> this issue which causes CPython to crash when the code below is run.
>> It crashes on both 2
Dino Viehland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> We've been working on fixing some exception handling bugs in
> IronPython where we differ from CPython. Along the way we ran into
> this issue which causes CPython to crash when the code below is run.
> It crashes on both 2.4 and 2.5 beta 3. The code
We've been working on fixing some exception handling bugs in IronPython where
we differ from CPython. Along the way we ran into this issue which causes
CPython to crash when the code below is run. It crashes on both 2.4 and 2.5
beta 3. The code's technically illegal, but it probably shouldn't
13 matches
Mail list logo
