[issue9614] _pickle is not entirely 64-bit safe

Antoine Pitrou added the comment: This issue is obsolete, there are no 64-bit warnings in _pickle.c anymore. See issue 11564. -- resolution: -> out of date stage: patch review -> committed/rejected status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker

[issue9614] _pickle is not entirely 64-bit safe

Changes by Ezio Melotti : -- nosy: +brian.curtin stage: -> patch review ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsub

[issue9614] _pickle is not entirely 64-bit safe

Changes by Terry J. Reedy : -- versions: -Python 3.1 ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mai

[issue9614] _pickle is not entirely 64-bit safe

Alexander Belopolsky added the comment: I believe attached issue9614.diff should fix the warnings, but I don't have a box to test this on. -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file21800/issue9614.diff ___ Python tracker

[issue9614] _pickle is not entirely 64-bit safe

Alexander Belopolsky added the comment: On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 4:31 AM, Amaury Forgeot d'Arc wrote: >.. 027f81579b4a changed Pdata into a PyVarObject, and the "int length" member > is now accessed with the Py_SIZE() macro. ISTM that with this change Pdata struct is now indistinguishable from

[issue9614] _pickle is not entirely 64-bit safe

Amaury Forgeot d'Arc added the comment: Yes there are still warnings, but in different places; here is an extract of the previous buildlog.html file: ..\Modules\_pickle.c(156) : warning C4244:'initializing' : conversion from 'Py_ssize_t' to 'int', possible loss of data ..\Modules\_pickle.c(

[issue9614] _pickle is not entirely 64-bit safe

Amaury Forgeot d'Arc added the comment: The warnings above are a bit old: 027f81579b4a changed Pdata into a PyVarObject, and the "int length" member is now accessed with the Py_SIZE() macro. Unfortunately, the only win64 buildbot is offline, and I could not find any recent log of compilation

[issue9614] _pickle is not entirely 64-bit safe

Alexander Belopolsky added the comment: > The warnings at lines 284, 301, 461, 647 are benign. I agree. There is no loss of data because Py_ssize_t variable bounds are checked before these lines are reached. > The attached patch fixes them. I don't like these changes: -Pdata_poptuple(Pdata

[issue9614] _pickle is not entirely 64-bit safe

Changes by Raymond Hettinger : -- nosy: +rhettinger priority: normal -> high ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list U

[issue9614] _pickle is not entirely 64-bit safe

Alexander Belopolsky added the comment: See also issue 10640. -- nosy: +belopolsky ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing

[issue9614] _pickle is not entirely 64-bit safe

Changes by Santoso Wijaya : -- versions: +Python 3.3 ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail

[issue9614] _pickle is not entirely 64-bit safe

Changes by Santoso Wijaya : -- nosy: +santa4nt ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.pytho

[issue9614] _pickle is not entirely 64-bit safe

Changes by Jon Anglin : -- nosy: +janglin ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org

[issue9614] _pickle is not entirely 64-bit safe

Amaury Forgeot d'Arc added the comment: The warnings at lines 284, 301, 461, 647 are benign. The attached patch fixes them. The others (lines 628, 1320, 1558, 1806) are real issues: pickle will fail when given a list, a tuple or a dict larger than INT_MAX, or when the memo is too large. The

[issue9614] _pickle is not entirely 64-bit safe

New submission from Antoine Pitrou : A number of legitimate warnings get emitted under a 64-bit Windows build (in many places, _pickle uses ints or longs instead of "Py_ssize_t" variable to store various lengths and sizes): 1>..\Modules\_pickle.c(284) : warning C4244: '=' : conversion from 'Py