patch for 1441408 compiler fails to spot extended slice

[logistix]

BPO	1446847
Nosy	@ncoghlan
Files	extended_slice.diff: patch for extended slices

^{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 2006-03-17.18:01:56.000>
created_at = <Date 2006-03-10.00:21:40.000>
labels = ['interpreter-core']
title = 'patch for 1441408  compiler fails to spot extended slice'
updated_at = <Date 2006-03-17.18:01:56.000>
user = 'https://bugs.python.org/logistix'

bugs.python.org fields:

activity = <Date 2006-03-17.18:01:56.000>
actor = 'ncoghlan'
assignee = 'none'
closed = True
closed_date = None
closer = None
components = ['Interpreter Core']
creation = <Date 2006-03-10.00:21:40.000>
creator = 'logistix'
dependencies = []
files = ['7066']
hgrepos = []
issue_num = 1446847
keywords = ['patch']
message_count = 3.0
messages = ['49707', '49708', '49709']
nosy_count = 2.0
nosy_names = ['logistix', 'ncoghlan']
pr_nums = []
priority = 'normal'
resolution = 'duplicate'
stage = None
status = 'closed'
superseder = None
type = None
url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue1446847'
versions = ['Python 2.5']

[logistix]

Attached is a patch for bug 1441408 (svn head compiler
fails to spot extended slicing). The problem was that
the new compiler was assuming that a null step value
meant that normal slicing was being used. I did have
to modify the .asdl for this to work, but after trying
a few approaches this seemed like the simplest.

[ncoghlan]

Logged In: YES
user_id=1038590

Is changing the AST for this is really necessary? Why not
simply insert "None" as the step subexpression in the
generated AST?

[ncoghlan]

Logged In: YES
user_id=1038590

Applied patch 1452332 instead (simpler fix to same problem)