Bugs item #1501934, was opened at 2006-06-06 23:57
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by nascheme
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=105470&aid=1501934&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: Python 2.5
Status: Open
Resolution: None
Priority: 8
Submitted By: Thomas Wouters (twouters)
Assigned to: Jeremy Hylton (jhylton)
Summary: incorrect LOAD/STORE_GLOBAL generation
Initial Comment:
Python 2.5 compiles the following piece of code
differently than Python 2.4:
g = 1
def f():
g += 1
In Python 2.4, this raises an UnboundLocalError. In
current svn trunk, it will increment the global g by 1.
(dis.dis shows that it actually compiles into
LOAD/STORE_GLOBAL opcodes.) It seems the compiler
doesn't treat augmented assignment as assignment for
the purpose of determining locals, as this still fails
correctly:
g = 1
def f():
g += 1
g = 5
I can't find where this optimization happens nowadays,
but it feels like a short fix.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>Comment By: Neil Schemenauer (nascheme)
Date: 2006-06-30 22:03
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=35752
Adding a patch to "fix" test_ast.py. I have no idea what
the test is trying to verify. It looks like it was written
by martin.v.loewis so maybe he can comment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Neil Schemenauer (nascheme)
Date: 2006-06-30 17:51
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=35752
I've got a simple fix that seems to work. I feel this part
of the compiler could use some more serious cleanups but
probably not for 2.5. Note that test_ast fails after
applying my patch. I haven't had time to look into that yet
but I think it's shallow.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Neil Schemenauer (nascheme)
Date: 2006-06-30 16:22
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=35752
Here are some notes in case I wear out before finding a fix.
analyze_name() gets to the SET_SCOPE(dict, name,
GLOBAL_IMPLICIT) line because the name does not have the
DEF_LOCAL flag set as it should. It does not have DEF_LOCAL
because Name.ctx for 'g' is Load. I believe there should be
a set_context() call in ast_for_expr_stmt, as flagged as
TODO by Jeremy. Maybe set_context(..., Store, ...) would
work or maybe things need to be changed to allow ctx to have
AugAssign as a value.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment By: Thomas Wouters (twouters)
Date: 2006-06-19 17:44
Message:
Logged In: YES
user_id=34209
Possibly related is the discovery of free variables (used
when forming closures) and optimized-out codeblocks:
>>> def foo(x):
... def bar():
... if 0:
... print x
... return bar
In 2.4, there is no closure:
>>> foo.func_code.co_cellvars
()
>>> foo(5).func_closure
>>>
In 2.5, there is:
>>> foo.func_code.co_cellvars
('x',)
>>> foo(5).func_closure
(<cell at 0x2b9abf6d7e30: int object at 0x6b6580>,)
(I don't think it's unreasonable to declare the old
behaviour bugged, though :-)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can respond by visiting:
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=105470&aid=1501934&group_id=5470
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
