Ka-Ping Yee <ping@lfw.org> writes:
> I just tried this:
>
> Python 2.1b1 (#15, Mar 16 2001, 04:31:43)
> [GCC egcs-2.91.66 19990314/Linux (egcs-1.1.2 release)] on linux2
> Type "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
> >>> from __future__ import nested_scopes
> >>> def f(x):
> ... x = x + 1
> ... a = x + 3
> ... b = x + 5
> ... def g(y):
> ... def h(z):
> ... return a, b, x, y, z
> ... return h
> ... return g
> ...
> Fatal Python error: non-string found in code slot
> Aborted (core dumped)
Here, look at this:
static int
symtable_freevar_offsets(PyObject *freevars, int offset)
{
PyObject *name, *v;
int pos;
/* The cell vars are the first elements of the closure,
followed by the free vars. Update the offsets in
c_freevars to account for number of cellvars. */
pos = 0;
while (PyDict_Next(freevars, &pos, &name, &v)) {
int i = PyInt_AS_LONG(v) + offset;
PyObject *o = PyInt_FromLong(i);
if (o == NULL)
return -1;
if (PyDict_SetItem(freevars, name, o) < 0) {
Py_DECREF(o);
return -1;
}
Py_DECREF(o);
}
return 0;
}
this modifies the dictionary you're iterating over. This is, as they
say, a Bad Idea[*].
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=409864&group_id=5470&atid=305470
is a minimal-effort/impact fix. I don't know the new compile.c well
enough to really judge the best fix.
Cheers,
M.
[*] I thought that if you used the same keys when you were iterating
over a dict you were safe. It seems not, at least as far as I
could tell with mounds of debugging printf's.
--
(Of course SML does have its weaknesses, but by comparison, a
discussion of C++'s strengths and flaws always sounds like an
argument about whether one should face north or east when one
is sacrificing one's goat to the rain god.) -- Thant Tessman
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