STINNER Victor added the comment: > Another much larger change would be to change f_lasti to -2...
Attached lasti.patch implements this idea. I consider that it makes the C code simpler because getting the next instruction (f_lasti + 2) doesn't require a special case anymore. My patch keeps f_lasti == -1 at the Python level for backward compatibility. lasti.patch is only a backward incompatible change at the C level. -- Between pygen_yf.patch and lasti.patch, I prefer lasti.patch even if 3.6 is at its last beta version before the final version. I prefer to fix the C API. Later it will be much harder to fix it. -- I read again the wordcode issue #26647: I wrote on the review of wpy7.patch: "The overall change LGTM, but I'm no more 100% sure that starting f_lasti=-1 is safe." http://bugs.python.org/review/26647/#msg17 I wrote: "IMHO it's ok to break the C API, but I would prefer to keep the backward compatibility for the Python API (replace any negative number with -1 for the Python API)." http://bugs.python.org/issue26647#msg262758 Serhiy: "I think we should make yet few related changes: (...) * Change f_lasti, tb_lasti etc to count code units instead of bytes." http://bugs.python.org/issue26647#msg262758 ---------- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file45615/lasti.patch _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue28782> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
