Message 338542 - Python tracker

➜

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	methane, pablogsal, serhiy.storchaka, vstinner
Date	2019-03-21.14:14:02
SpamBayes Score	-1.0
Marked as misclassified	Yes
Message-id	<1553177642.56.0.940170236762.issue36389@roundup.psfhosted.org>
In-reply-to

Content
> It is better to not use assert(foo && bar). Use instead two separate asserts: assrte(foo) and assert(bar). Hum, I looked at my PR and I'm not sure that I added such new assertion. Note: "assert" on calling assert(_PyDict_CheckConsistency(mp)) is only used to remove the call in release build, but the function always return 1. The function does uses assert() or _PyObject_ASSERT() internally with a different line number and the exact failing expression. Do you want me to enhance existing _PyDict_CheckConsistency() assertions in the same PR?

> It is better to not use assert(foo && bar). Use instead two separate asserts: assrte(foo) and assert(bar).

Hum, I looked at my PR and I'm not sure that I added such new assertion.

Note: "assert" on calling assert(_PyDict_CheckConsistency(mp)) is only used to remove the call in release build, but the function always return 1. The function does uses assert() or _PyObject_ASSERT() internally with a different line number and the exact failing expression.

Do you want me to enhance existing _PyDict_CheckConsistency() assertions in the same PR?

History
Date	User	Action	Args
2019-03-21 14:14:02	vstinner	set	recipients: + vstinner, methane, serhiy.storchaka, pablogsal
2019-03-21 14:14:02	vstinner	set	messageid: <1553177642.56.0.940170236762.issue36389@roundup.psfhosted.org>
2019-03-21 14:14:02	vstinner	link	issue36389 messages
2019-03-21 14:14:02	vstinner	create