[3.14] GH-135171: Fix generator expressions one last time (hopefully) #135225
+92
−19
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Please restore also old tests. I think this change should be made in |
|
I'll add back the old test. This change can't be made in main due to the the changes to the way that iteration is implemented. |
|
Then we need to rollback more changes in main. |
efimov-mikhail
approved these changes
Jun 7, 2025
|
Thanks @markshannon for the PR 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.13. |
|
Sorry, @markshannon, I could not cleanly backport this to |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This PR adds a NULL check for
tp_iternexttoFOR_ITERto prevent the crash in #125038.It then moves
GET_ITERback to generation expression creation, thus fixing #135171 and avoids re-introducing #127682 by ensuringGET_ITERis never added twice.I've chosen to make a new PR rather than reverting earlier ones as I want to keep all the new tests we've added, and it is probably easier to review than multiple reverts.
@hugovk @Yhg1s