Tim Peters <t...@python.org> added the comment:
I left the code in because it was harmless (a 100%-predictable branch), and it was easier to show that overflow was _considered_ than to explain in full why it was impossible. In the context of CPython. For example, the Java port of this code couldn't rely on the far-removed-from-this-code details of Python's C heap management (the largest Java signed integer is a legit Java array index), and signed integer overflow _is_ wholly defined in Java. Which happens to be the same way it worked under virtually all C compilers at the time the code was written. The idea that C compilers should be as aggressive as Fortran compilers instead of just supplying a portable assembly language is a modern conceit ;-) The code is useless, but it's not "a bug", so I'm removing Python 2 from the list of targets. ---------- versions: -Python 2.7 _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue35091> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
