David Hopwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Armin Rigo wrote: >> Hi, >> >> There is an oversight in the design of __index__() that only just >> surfaced :-( It is responsible for the following behavior, on a 32-bit >> machine with >= 2GB of RAM: >> >> >>> s = 'x' * (2**100) # works! >> >>> len(s) >> 2147483647 >> >> This is because PySequence_Repeat(v, w) works by applying w.__index__ in >> order to call v->sq_repeat. However, __index__ is defined to clip the >> result to fit in a Py_ssize_t. > > Clipping the result sounds like it would *never* be a good idea. What was > the rationale for that? It should throw an exception.
Why would you expect range(10)[:2**32-1] and range(10)[:2**32] to do different things? Cheers, mwh -- This makes it possible to pass complex object hierarchies to a C coder who thinks computer science has made no worthwhile advancements since the invention of the pointer. -- Gordon McMillan, 30 Jul 1998 _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com