sys.flags is missing bytes_warning:

Python 2.6a2+ (trunk, May  8 2008, 12:09:50) 
[GCC 4.2.3 (Debian 4.2.3-3)] on linux2
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> sys.flags
sys.flags(debug=0, py3k_warning=0, division_warning=0, division_new=0,
inspect=0, interactive=0, optimize=0, dont_write_bytecode=0,
no_user_site=0, no_site=0, ignore_environment=0, tabcheck=0, verbose=0,
unicode=0)

This is only used from warnings.py currently:

~/pydev/trunk/ ack bytes_warning                                       
                                 
Lib/warnings.py
311:    bytes_warning = sys.flags.bytes_warning
312:    if bytes_warning > 1:
314:    elif bytes_warning:

Python/sysmodule.c
1172:	{"bytes_warning", "-b"},

(I only see an attribute error in frozen programs).

The attached patch fixes it by not using the sizeof operator to compute
the size of the array.

This gives:
>>> sys.flags
sys.flags(debug=0, py3k_warning=0, division_warning=0, division_new=0,
inspect=0, interactive=0, optimize=0, dont_write_bytecode=0,
no_user_site=0, no_site=0, ignore_environment=0, tabcheck=0, verbose=0,
unicode=0, bytes_warning=0)

brett, I added you to the nosy list, as you seem to have committed this
in r62303 (http://hgpy.de/py/trunk/rev/ac1ae32a476c)

Ralf, can you do a ``make clean`` and then try again? I had this happen to 
me with an old checkout until I did that and then everything worked fine.

sure, I even removed the whole source tree:
~/pydev/trunk/ ./python                                          
ralf@rat64 ok
Python 2.6a3+ (trunk, May  8 2008, 21:52:39) 
[GCC 4.2.3 (Debian 4.2.3-3)] on linux2
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> sys.flags
sys.flags(debug=0, py3k_warning=0, division_warning=0, division_new=0,
inspect=0, interactive=0, optimize=0, dont_write_bytecode=0,
no_user_site=0, no_site=0, ignore_environment=0, tabcheck=0, verbose=0,
unicode=0)

You can count the entries manually if you don't believe. The given count
is off by one.

Fixed in r62896.

why not use sizeof? you'll probably run into this again..

btw, I guess that sentinel entry in that array could also be removed?

I didn't use sizeof because I didn't think of it; the solution to just 
change the numbers was right in front of me and I am swamped with other 
work so I went with what I knew would work.

As for removing the array, perhaps, but I don't have time to try that out.

ok brett, I see in IRC you're doing lot's of commits currently. sorry
for bothering you. I'll maybe try myself, it's a minor issue anyway...