gh-122358: Remove re._compile#122357
Conversation
wimglenn
force-pushed
the
re-compile
branch
3 times, most recently
from
4e06a9c to
e6506a6
Compare
ZeroIntensity
left a comment
ZeroIntensity
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM, GitHub is making the diff look weird.
|
Please add a news entry. If you use the blurb CLI, please upgrade to 1.2: https://discuss.python.org/t/new-blurb-1-2-please-upgrade/59159 |
Move implementation directly into re.compile. Simplifies tracebacks and reduces call stack.
|
@hugovk Blurbed it, though there is no user-facing change here. |
|
Thanks! Also please don't force push in this repo, we squash merge everything at the end: https://devguide.python.org/getting-started/pull-request-lifecycle/#quick-guide |
| newpat = pickle.loads(pickled) | ||
| self.assertEqual(newpat, oldpat) | ||
| # current pickle expects the _compile() reconstructor in re module | ||
| # previous pickles may expect the _compile() reconstructor in re module |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it worth adding a test for pickles that expect _compile()? ("No" is a valid answer)
…pnaq4.rst Co-authored-by: Adam Turner <9087854+AA-Turner@users.noreply.github.com>
|
There are arguments against this change. See details in my comment in the issue. |
This uses the warnings feature skip_file_prefixes added in 3.12 python#100840
|
@serhiy-storchaka ping? anything more to do here? |
|
This PR is stale because it has been open for 30 days with no activity. |
6 participants
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.