Andrea Griffini <agr...@tin.it> added the comment: This is a fix for this issue.
The solution was to add two fields (recursion_depth and recursion_limit) to the symbol table object and just increment and check the depth in symtable_visit_expr raising a RuntimeError in case the limit is exceeded. The test case added also covers other similar cases (a.b.b.b.b.b... and a[0][0][0][0]....) There is no depth check in when visiting statement because I cannot think to a way to nesting statements too much without getting other errors before. If there is a way to do it, it would be trivial to also cover that part. The patch uses the current depth and current recursion limit but multiplies them for a factor because I suppose that the amount of C stack used by the compiler per recursion is smaller than the amount used by the interpreter; the constant in the patch is 4. Using a constant of 1 (i.e. just using the normal recursion limit) doesn't allow a previously existing test about big expressions to pass. ---------- keywords: +patch nosy: +ag6502 Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26293/compiler_recursion_limit_check.patch _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue5765> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
