➜
This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub,
and is currently read-only.
For more information,
see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
Created on 2011-08-25 20:31 by skrah, last changed 2022-04-11 14:57 by admin. This issue is now closed.
| Files | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| File name | Uploaded | Description | Edit | |
| tp_richcompare.diff | skrah, 2011-08-25 20:31 | review | ||
| Messages (3) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| msg142991 - (view) | Author: Stefan Krah (skrah) *  |
Date: 2011-08-25 20:31 | |
I've noticed that assumptions about the operand types in tp_richcompare() are not always consistent. As far as I can see, the first parameter in tp_richcompare() is guaranteed to be of the correct type. But in some places the first parameter's type is still checked: Objects/cellobject.c: if (!PyCell_Check(a) || !PyCell_Check(b)) { The attached patch makes it clear that the first parameter has the correct type. |
|||
| msg221489 - (view) | Author: Mark Lawrence (BreamoreBoy) * | Date: 2014-06-24 20:09 | |
The patch has never been applied. I'm not qualified to state whether or not it is correct. |
|||
| msg222173 - (view) | Author: Andrew Svetlov (asvetlov) * |
Date: 2014-07-03 13:09 | |
Fixed in 71a0743f36db and 06bdd7e8fffd |
|||
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2022-04-11 14:57:21 | admin | set | github: 57051 |
| 2014-07-03 13:09:29 | asvetlov | set | status: open -> closed versions: + Python 3.4, Python 3.5, - Python 2.7, Python 3.2, Python 3.3 nosy: + asvetlov messages: + msg222173 resolution: fixed stage: patch review -> resolved |
| 2014-06-24 20:09:45 | BreamoreBoy | set | nosy:
+ BreamoreBoy messages: + msg221489 |
| 2011-08-26 15:16:10 | eric.araujo | set | keywords:
+ needs review stage: patch review versions: - Python 3.1 |
| 2011-08-25 20:31:24 | skrah | create | |