> [Mark Favas, on new test_sre failures]
> > Is it just me, or is test_sre meant to fail, following the recent
> > changes to _sre.c?
I just checked in a fix for this. /F also implemented PEP 223, and it had a
surprising consequece for test_sre! There were three test lines (in a loop,
that's why you got so many failures) of the form:
test(r"""sre.match("\x%02x" % i, chr(i)) != None""", 1)
Note the
"\x%02x"
part. Before PEP 223, that "expanded" to itself:
"\x%02x"
because the damaged \x escape was ignored. After PEP223, it raised the
ValueError: invalid \x escape
you kept seeing. The fix was merely to change these 3 lines to use, e.g.,
r"\x%02x"
instead. Pattern strings should usually be r-strings anyway.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4