Backport of bytearray type and io module
Hello! I've successfully back ported the bytearray type and the io module from 3.0 to 2.6. The code is available in the branch trunk-bytearray [1]. I'm down to four failing byte tests and one failing io test. The failing byte tests are all related to pickling and subclassing. I like to get the remaining tests fixed for the upcoming release in a week. Please checkout the branch and help me figure out the remaining issues. Christian [1] svn+ssh://pythondev@svn.python.org/python/branches/trunk-bytearray
Christian Heimes schrieb:
Hello!
I've successfully back ported the bytearray type and the io module from 3.0 to 2.6. The code is available in the branch trunk-bytearray [1]. I'm down to four failing byte tests and one failing io test. The failing byte tests are all related to pickling and subclassing.
I like to get the remaining tests fixed for the upcoming release in a week. Please checkout the branch and help me figure out the remaining issues.
Follow up: All failing bytearray tests were caused by subclasses of bytearray. I've removed the Py_TPFLAGS_BASETYPE flag for now. Are you fine with the inclusion of bytearray although it can't be subclassed? I'm going to fix the last io bug now. I like to merge the backport of bytearray and io before the next alpha gets shipped out. Christian
I'm okay with bytearray not being subclassable in 2.6 as a temporary measure. I wouldn't want that to leak into 3.0 though, and I'd rather have it subclassable in 2.6 as well. I wonder why it doesn't work in 2.6 but does work in 3.0? On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 5:05 PM, Christian Heimes <lists@cheimes.de> wrote:
Christian Heimes schrieb:
Hello!
I've successfully back ported the bytearray type and the io module from 3.0 to 2.6. The code is available in the branch trunk-bytearray [1]. I'm down to four failing byte tests and one failing io test. The failing byte tests are all related to pickling and subclassing.
I like to get the remaining tests fixed for the upcoming release in a week. Please checkout the branch and help me figure out the remaining issues.
Follow up:
All failing bytearray tests were caused by subclasses of bytearray. I've removed the Py_TPFLAGS_BASETYPE flag for now. Are you fine with the inclusion of bytearray although it can't be subclassed?
I'm going to fix the last io bug now. I like to merge the backport of bytearray and io before the next alpha gets shipped out.
Christian
-- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
Guido van Rossum schrieb:
I'm okay with bytearray not being subclassable in 2.6 as a temporary measure. I wouldn't want that to leak into 3.0 though, and I'd rather have it subclassable in 2.6 as well. I wonder why it doesn't work in 2.6 but does work in 3.0?
It *seems* like the comparison ops don't work correctly for subclasses. In general subclassing works but comparison of subclasses result in wrong results. It's probably easy to fix but I haven't figured it out yet. Christian
Guido van Rossum schrieb:
I'm okay with bytearray not being subclassable in 2.6 as a temporary measure. I wouldn't want that to leak into 3.0 though, and I'd rather have it subclassable in 2.6 as well. I wonder why it doesn't work in 2.6 but does work in 3.0?
This fix for the issue was easy once I noticed the cause of the problem Modified: python/branches/trunk-bytearray/Objects/typeobject.c ============================================================================== --- python/branches/trunk-bytearray/Objects/typeobject.c (original) +++ python/branches/trunk-bytearray/Objects/typeobject.c Wed Mar 26 13:20:46 2008 @@ -3762,6 +3762,8 @@ COPYBUF(bf_getwritebuffer); COPYBUF(bf_getsegcount); COPYBUF(bf_getcharbuffer); + COPYBUF(bf_getbuffer); + COPYBUF(bf_releasebuffer); } basebase = base->tp_base; Christian
2008/3/26, Christian Heimes <lists@cheimes.de>:
I'm okay with bytearray not being subclassable in 2.6 as a temporary measure. I wouldn't want that to leak into 3.0 though, and I'd rather have it subclassable in 2.6 as well. I wonder why it doesn't work in 2.6 but does work in 3.0?
This fix for the issue was easy once I noticed the cause of the problem
Modified: python/branches/trunk-bytearray/Objects/typeobject.c
So, now the byte object behaves equal in 2.6 and 3.0, right? Thanks! -- . Facundo Blog: http://www.taniquetil.com.ar/plog/ PyAr: http://www.python.org/ar/
2008/3/26, Christian Heimes <lists@cheimes.de>:
Correct!
The bytearray type and the new IO system are now backported to Python 2.6.
Thank you very much for this effort! Regards, -- . Facundo Blog: http://www.taniquetil.com.ar/plog/ PyAr: http://www.python.org/ar/
Yay indeed! Of course the new I/O module will undergo changes (Ping is working on it still I believe). Try to keep an eye on it so the improvements can be backported. On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 6:00 AM, Facundo Batista <facundobatista@gmail.com> wrote:
2008/3/26, Christian Heimes <lists@cheimes.de>:
Correct!
The bytearray type and the new IO system are now backported to Python 2.6.
Thank you very much for this effort!
Regards,
-- . Facundo
Blog: http://www.taniquetil.com.ar/plog/ PyAr: http://www.python.org/ar/
-- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
Guido van Rossum schrieb:
Yay indeed! Of course the new I/O module will undergo changes (Ping is working on it still I believe). Try to keep an eye on it so the improvements can be backported.
Could somebody (perhaps me *g*) create a 3to2 fixer that removes the function annotations? IIRC I only had to remove the annotations from the io module and add a "from __future__ import print_function" to get it working correctly. Christian
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> wrote:
Yay indeed! Of course the new I/O module will undergo changes (Ping is working on it still I believe). Try to keep an eye on it so the improvements can be backported.
So improvements to backported features will be merged into 2.6?
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 6:00 AM, Facundo Batista <facundobatista@gmail.com> wrote:
2008/3/26, Christian Heimes <lists@cheimes.de>:
Correct!
The bytearray type and the new IO system are now backported to Python 2.6.
Thank you very much for this effort!
Regards,
-- . Facundo
Blog: http://www.taniquetil.com.ar/plog/ PyAr: http://www.python.org/ar/
-- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/<http://www.python.org/%7Eguido/> ) _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/musiccomposition%40gmail.c...
-- Cheers, Benjamin Peterson
participants (4)
-
Benjamin Peterson -
Christian Heimes -
Facundo Batista -
Guido van Rossum