Mark Dickinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> added the comment: One more minor deficiency in the patch: it gives incorrect results for very large integers. For example, on a 32-bit build of the trunk:
>>> x = 1 << 2**31-1 >>> x <<= 2**31-1 >>> x.numbits() # expect 4294967295 4294967295L >>> x <<= 2 >>> x.numbits() # expect 4294967297 4294967295L It would be nicer if the OverflowError from _PyLong_NumBits were propagated, so that the second case raises OverflowError instead of giving an incorrect result. Alternatively, in case of OverflowError one could recompute numbits correctly, without overflow, by using Python longs instead of a C size_t; but this would mean adding little-used, and probably little-tested, extra code for what must be a very rare special case. Probably not worth it. _______________________________________ Python tracker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://bugs.python.org/issue3439> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
