Paul Pogonyshev added the comment: Thanks for writing the test.
Yes, I did read the comment. As I understood it, RETURN_VALUE is needed only so that various optimization can assume codestr[] cannot suddenly end without one. E.g. if you match for BINARY_ADD, you can safely check the next command: if BINARY_ADD matched, there is a _guaranteed_ next command, not an out-of-array failure. Such proposed fake RETURN_VALUE _must_ be unreachable, so it must not be problematic at all. If it was reachable, real codestr[] would end in reachable non-return command, which must not happen during compilation. I dunno, maybe interpreter guards against execution point falling of the bytecode string, but in any case this must not happen in non-corrupted files generated by the bytecode compiler. __________________________________ Tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://bugs.python.org/issue1394> __________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
