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.

Author sbt
Recipients Yury.Selivanov, asvetlov, benjamin.peterson, ncoghlan, pitrou, sbt
Date 2012-04-24.18:19:50
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1335291590.91.0.560722352047.issue14369@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
Shouldn't test___closure__() also test what happens when the closure is replaced with None, or a tuple which is too long or too short or contains non-cell objects?

All of these things seem to be checked when you create a new function using types.FunctionType:

>>> h = types.FunctionType(g.__code__, g.__globals__, "h", g.__defaults__, None)
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
TypeError: arg 5 (closure) must be tuple
>>> h = types.FunctionType(g.__code__, g.__globals__, "h", g.__defaults__, ())
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
ValueError: g requires closure of length 2, not 0
>>> h = types.FunctionType(g.__code__, g.__globals__, "h", g.__defaults__, (1,2))
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
TypeError: arg 5 (closure) expected cell, found int

I think the setter should make similar checks.  Maybe there is C code which assumes "broken" closures never happen.
History
Date User Action Args
2012-04-24 18:19:50sbtsetrecipients: + sbt, ncoghlan, pitrou, benjamin.peterson, asvetlov, Yury.Selivanov
2012-04-24 18:19:50sbtsetmessageid: <1335291590.91.0.560722352047.issue14369@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2012-04-24 18:19:50sbtlinkissue14369 messages
2012-04-24 18:19:50sbtcreate