[issue6066] POP_MARK was not in pickle protocol 0

Collin Winter added the comment: Applied in r72792 (trunk), r72793 (py3k), r72808 (release26-maint). -- assignee: -> collinwinter resolution: -> fixed status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker ___

[issue6066] POP_MARK was not in pickle protocol 0

Alexandre Vassalotti added the comment: SHORT_BINBYTES needs to be corrected as well; pickletools lists it as part of protocol 0 instead of protocol 3. I doubt backporting this patch to 2.6 will cause any trouble. So, you can go forward with this. -- __

[issue6066] POP_MARK was not in pickle protocol 0

New submission from Collin Winter : Lib/pickletools.py incorrectly thinks POP_MARK was part of protocol 0; POP_MARK was only added with the introduction of protocol 1 in r7753. This mistake led me down a dead end while fixing another pickling issue. Alexandre, can you double-check me on this? Fe