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 glchapman
Date 2003-04-22.19:21:46
SpamBayes Score
Marked as misclassified
Logged In: YES 

Gustavo, in my understanding, it doesn't matter if the first part 
of MAX_UNTIL is protected because if its call to 
SRE_MATCH returns 0, it (the first part of MAX_UNTIL) 
simply returns 0 to its caller.  If that caller is a backtrack 
point (a point which may resume matching even though a call 
to SRE_MATCH returned 0), it should have already saved 
lastmark, etc. and so should be ready to restore them to its 
saved values.  If that caller is not a backtrack point, it is 
either the original invocation of SRE_MATCH (in which case it 
doesn't matter what is in the state since the match has failed) 
or it is someplace which is going to return 0 to its caller.

FYI, I have uploaded a couple of more sre bug 
reports/patches in the last couple of days; I'd appreciate it if 
you look at them.

In particular, the second patch changes ASSERT_NOT so 
that (I hope) it no longer violates the assumptions above.
Date User Action Args
2007-08-23 15:21:50adminlinkissue712900 messages
2007-08-23 15:21:50admincreate