Author sbt
Recipients brian.curtin, mark.dickinson, pitrou, sbt, schlamar, serhiy.storchaka, terry.reedy, tim.golden
Date 2012-12-26.15:43:14
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1356536595.36.0.47287128859.issue16743@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
> This change is not backward compatible. Now user can mmap a larger file 
> and safely access lower 2 GiB. With the patch it will fail.

They should specify length=2GiB-1 if that is what they want.

With length=0 you can only access the lower 2GiB if "file_size % 4GiB > 2GiB".  If the file size is 4GiB+1 then you can only access *one byte* of the file.  And if "2GiB < file_size < 4GiB" then presumably len(data) will be negative (or throw an exception or fail an assertion -- I have not tested that case).  I would not be surprised if crashes are possible.

Basically if you had a "large" file and you did not hit a problem then it was Windows specific dumb luck.  I see no point in retaining such unpredictable behaviour.
History
Date User Action Args
2012-12-26 15:43:15sbtsetrecipients: + sbt, terry.reedy, mark.dickinson, pitrou, tim.golden, brian.curtin, schlamar, serhiy.storchaka
2012-12-26 15:43:15sbtsetmessageid: <1356536595.36.0.47287128859.issue16743@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2012-12-26 15:43:15sbtlinkissue16743 messages
2012-12-26 15:43:14sbtcreate