pickle_complex in copy_reg.py

[nnorwitz]

BPO	595837
Nosy	@gvanrossum, @loewis, @arigo

^{Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.}

Show more details

GitHub fields:

assignee = None
closed_at = <Date 2003-06-07.20:12:13.000>
created_at = <Date 2002-08-16.03:28:45.000>
labels = ['library']
title = 'pickle_complex in copy_reg.py'
updated_at = <Date 2003-06-07.20:12:13.000>
user = 'https://bugs.python.org/nnorwitz'

bugs.python.org fields:

activity = <Date 2003-06-07.20:12:13.000>
actor = 'loewis'
assignee = 'nnorwitz'
closed = True
closed_date = None
closer = None
components = ['Library (Lib)']
creation = <Date 2002-08-16.03:28:45.000>
creator = 'nnorwitz'
dependencies = []
files = []
hgrepos = []
issue_num = 595837
keywords = []
message_count = 5.0
messages = ['12014', '12015', '12016', '12017', '12018']
nosy_count = 4.0
nosy_names = ['gvanrossum', 'loewis', 'nnorwitz', 'arigo']
pr_nums = []
priority = 'normal'
resolution = 'fixed'
stage = None
status = 'closed'
superseder = None
type = None
url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue595837'
versions = ['Python 2.3']

[nnorwitz]

This code is in copy_reg.py from 1997:

def pickle_complex(c):
    return complex, (c.real, c.imag)

pickle(type(1j), pickle_complex, complex)

I'm not sure if the function pickle_complex() is
necessary, but it definitely seems that the line after
should be commented out or removed. pickle_complex()
is not in the doc either.

(I was building WITHOUT_COMPLEX and found this problem.)

[gvanrossum]

Logged In: YES
user_id=6380

Without that line you can't pickle complex numbers. Maybe it
should fail gracefully if complex doesn't exist. Feel free
to check in a fix for that.

[gvanrossum]

Logged In: YES
user_id=6380

I'm rejecting this as invalid. Neal, if you disagree, just
reopen and assign to me.

[arigo]

Logged In: YES
user_id=4771

proposed patch bpo-750595.

[loewis]

Logged In: YES
user_id=21627

I have committed the patch for 2.2 and 2.3, fixing this bug.