Message232367
| Author |
hakril |
| Recipients |
hakril, mark.dickinson, r.david.murray, rhettinger, serhiy.storchaka, vstinner |
| Date |
2014年12月09日.10:46:39 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1418121999.47.0.576207634511.issue22939@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
> Also, PY_SSIZE_T_MAX is a valid value to pass to PySequence_GetItem(), so it shouldn't be blocked unless necessary.
I agree with you, that's why my first path was checking at the next call if it->it_index had overflowed. But then it relies on undefined behaviour.
> I would think that the PY_SSIZE_T_MAX check belongs inside the:
>
> if (result != NULL) {
> it->it_index++;
> return result;
> }
If we raise the OverflowError when it->it_index really overflow (just after the getitem PY_SSIZE_T_MAX).
Is it really necessary to do the overflow check after the GetItem ? because the value returned by `PySequence_GetItem(seq, PY_SSIZE_T_MAX);` will be never used. |
|