Pablo Galindo Salgado <pablog...@gmail.com> added the comment:
> First, it breaks backward compatibility for older code that creates ast.Num > without specifying kind The ast changes during versions, and in the current master there are no "Num" nodes, so not much we could do there safely. >Second, since bytes are parsed as a Constant without a kind, one can create >the following (valid as of now) AST and unparse it: You can create multiple malformed ast objects that will crash the interpreter if you pass it to `compile` or other functions that expect a valid AST. Passing invalid AST objects to these functions is out of contract (also, sanitizing that an AST is valid will make this functions much slower and will be a lot of code to maintain and CPython itself will not benefit much from it). ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue39463> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
