Bugs item #1190011, was opened at 2005-04-25 23:10 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by bcannon You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=105470&aid=1190011&group_id=5470
Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Parser/Compiler Group: AST >Status: Closed >Resolution: Accepted Priority: 5 Submitted By: Brett Cannon (bcannon) Assigned to: Brett Cannon (bcannon) Summary: [AST] distinct code objects not created Initial Comment: >> def f(): return ((lambda x=1: x), (lambda x=2: x)) >> f1, f2 = f() >> id(f1.func_code) != id(f2.func_code) The above does not hold true. It should according to test_compile (reported in HEAD as bug #1048870). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Brett Cannon (bcannon) Date: 2005-07-10 20:37 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=357491 Looks fine to me. Checked in as rev. 1.1.2.3 . test_compile now passes! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Nick Coghlan (ncoghlan) Date: 2005-05-28 05:11 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1038590 The same fix mwh used for HEAD appears to work for the AST branch, too (it's just in a different source file). Patch attached, and kicking in Brett's direction for review. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Nick Coghlan (ncoghlan) Date: 2005-05-28 04:02 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1038590 For the code above, Python 2.4.1 actually generates a single code object (that is, the comparison returns False). Looking closer at 1048870, this is expected, as the two lambdas are created on the same line. I'll look into this on the AST branch - I suspect the culprit may be our problems with getting the line numbering right. (FWIW, I worked out the UnboundLocal problem, and followed it up in the relevant bug, 1186353) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Nick Coghlan (ncoghlan) Date: 2005-05-28 01:26 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1038590 This seems to be the least of lambda's problems. A number of regression tests currently fail with UnboundLocalErrors, after an argument of the form "lambda (x, y): x" is passed to a function for invocation. Assigning to myself, since I'm about to take a look at the current misbehaviour of lambdas (they must be simpler than genexps, right?) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=105470&aid=1190011&group_id=5470 _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
