GeezerVisonThe World Wide Web, restored to 800 pixels of glory. | |||
| Home|About|Gaming cabinet|Archives|How it works|Starter sites | |||
GeezerVison is showing github.com — gh-115398: Increment PyExpat_CAPI_MAGIC for SetReparseDeferralEnabled addition by gpshead · Pull Request #116301 · python/cpython Conversation
|
|
This looks unnecessary: There's an extra size field that's also checked. See #115623 (comment) . |
All reactions
-
👍 1 reaction
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
hartwork
added a commit
to hartwork/cpython
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 6, 2024
…eferralEnabled addition (pythonGH-116301)" This reverts part of commit eda2963.
Contributor
|
It's also hurting, so I have created pull request #116411 now to revert the bump. |
All reactions
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
gpshead
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 6, 2024
Revert "gh-115398: Increment PyExpat_CAPI_MAGIC for SetReparseDeferralEnabled addition (GH-116301)" This reverts part of commit eda2963. Why? this comment buried in an earlier code review explains: I checked again how that value is used in practice, it's here: https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/0c80da4c14d904a367968955544dd6ae58c8101c/Modules/_elementtree.c#L4363-L4372 Based on that code my understanding is that loading bigger structs from the future is considered okay unless `PyExpat_CAPI_MAGIC` differs, which implies that (1) magic needs to stay the same to support loading the future from the past and (2) that `PyExpat_CAPI_MAGIC` should only ever change for changes that do not increase size (but keep it constant). To summarize, that supports your argument. I checked branches 3.8, 3.9, 3.10, 3.11, 3.12 now and they all have the same comparison code there so reverting that magic string bump will support seamless backporting.
Member
Author
|
I hadn't seen the earlier review comment, I just looked at the history of the magic and saw it was bumped up to 1.1 during a bugfix release 6+ years ago. I trust y'all's analysis. revert merged. |
All reactions
-
👍 1 reaction
Sorry, something went wrong.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
adorilson
pushed a commit
to adorilson/cpython
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 25, 2024
…nabled addition (pythonGH-116301) * Increment PyExpat_CAPI_MAGIC due to SetReparseDeferralEnabled addition. This is a followup to git commit 6a95676 from Github PR python#115623. * RESTify news API list.
adorilson
pushed a commit
to adorilson/cpython
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 25, 2024
…16411) Revert "pythongh-115398: Increment PyExpat_CAPI_MAGIC for SetReparseDeferralEnabled addition (pythonGH-116301)" This reverts part of commit eda2963. Why? this comment buried in an earlier code review explains: I checked again how that value is used in practice, it's here: https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/0c80da4c14d904a367968955544dd6ae58c8101c/Modules/_elementtree.c#L4363-L4372 Based on that code my understanding is that loading bigger structs from the future is considered okay unless `PyExpat_CAPI_MAGIC` differs, which implies that (1) magic needs to stay the same to support loading the future from the past and (2) that `PyExpat_CAPI_MAGIC` should only ever change for changes that do not increase size (but keep it constant). To summarize, that supports your argument. I checked branches 3.8, 3.9, 3.10, 3.11, 3.12 now and they all have the same comparison code there so reverting that magic string bump will support seamless backporting.
diegorusso
pushed a commit
to diegorusso/cpython
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 17, 2024
…nabled addition (pythonGH-116301) * Increment PyExpat_CAPI_MAGIC due to SetReparseDeferralEnabled addition. This is a followup to git commit 6a95676 from Github PR python#115623. * RESTify news API list.
diegorusso
pushed a commit
to diegorusso/cpython
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 17, 2024
…16411) Revert "pythongh-115398: Increment PyExpat_CAPI_MAGIC for SetReparseDeferralEnabled addition (pythonGH-116301)" This reverts part of commit eda2963. Why? this comment buried in an earlier code review explains: I checked again how that value is used in practice, it's here: https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/0c80da4c14d904a367968955544dd6ae58c8101c/Modules/_elementtree.c#L4363-L4372 Based on that code my understanding is that loading bigger structs from the future is considered okay unless `PyExpat_CAPI_MAGIC` differs, which implies that (1) magic needs to stay the same to support loading the future from the past and (2) that `PyExpat_CAPI_MAGIC` should only ever change for changes that do not increase size (but keep it constant). To summarize, that supports your argument. I checked branches 3.8, 3.9, 3.10, 3.11, 3.12 now and they all have the same comparison code there so reverting that magic string bump will support seamless backporting.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviewsUh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Assignees
Labels
None yet
Projects
Milestone
No milestoneDevelopment
Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.7 or Internet Explorer 6 at 800×600. No cookies required.