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 vstinner
Recipients brett.cannon, eric.snow, larry, ncoghlan, random832, rhettinger, serhiy.storchaka, vstinner, xiang.zhang
Date 2016-04-21.08:06:22
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1461225982.36.0.541231496411.issue26811@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
I suggest to remove the micro-optimization from Python 3.5 for safety.

I'm ok to experiment a new safer implementation on Python 3.6 ;-) We have more time to fix the code in Python 3.6 if new issues are found. Setting the tuple size to zero looks simple and safe, but the overall hack deserves a comment to explain:

* why you use a cached tuple
* why the reference count can be different than 2: recursive calls
* why do you change the tuple size
History
Date User Action Args
2016-04-21 08:06:22vstinnersetrecipients: + vstinner, brett.cannon, rhettinger, ncoghlan, larry, eric.snow, serhiy.storchaka, random832, xiang.zhang
2016-04-21 08:06:22vstinnersetmessageid: <1461225982.36.0.541231496411.issue26811@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2016-04-21 08:06:22vstinnerlinkissue26811 messages
2016-04-21 08:06:22vstinnercreate