Xiang Zhang added the comment: Thanks for your reply Raymond. You always provide thoughtful feedbacks, though it makes me somewhat more nervous. ;) (I am nervous about making noise here and waste others' time.)
> Have you checked all the possibly code paths to be sure? Yes. I did check all the code paths. I don't want to be a noise maker so I did check it carefully. > "Seems to be unnecessary" is insufficient reason for undoing Guido's code > that has stood since 1997. I use the word "seems" because even if I think my opinion is right, I am only 99% sure. Just as you said, the code is legacy and changing it has to be careful. I can miss something and be wrong. But now I think I am right. > Looking at the snarl of possible code paths, I not finding it obvious why > some of the paths require Py_XDECREF and others don't. When we reach the two Py_XDECREFs, can type and value be NULL? > then the patch needs to include assertions at key checkpoints (i.e. after a > given assignment to "type" or "value" can we reliably assert the value is > non-null) and/or comments showing what the reasoning is Sorry, I didn't realize that. This is definitely good practice I know. But this is not documented and not a must then so I didn't do that. But I'll remember this in later patches. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue27703> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
