Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork32k
gh-131357: Add tests for zero-sized bytes objects in test_bytes.py#134234
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Conversation
python-cla-botbot commentedMay 19, 2025 • edited
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
edited
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
You need to sign the CLA.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Lib/test/test_capi/test_bytes.py Outdated
# CRASHES check(NULL) | ||
# CRASHES check(NULL) #PyBytes_CheckExact() expects PyObject* |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
How are these comments related? They should probably be on two lines.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
Apologies; that was meant to explain why it crashes (it felt a little vague whether or not it was expected behavior). Would it be better on the next line, or in parenthesis or similar?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
explain why it crashes
Then it should be on the same line, but without the#
, as that makes it seem like 2 different notes.
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
Please do not click the "Update" button for no reason, see thedevguide. |
Oh, I apologize |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
I clicked on [Update branch] to try to repair the CI. |
Many CI fail with "cancelled", I don't know why :-( |
@vstinner Myself and@webknjaz figured it out, its a longstanding issue with the concurrency group specifier in our workflow not sufficiently disambiguating PRs when multiple contributors submit a PR with the same branch name, in this case |
Close/reopen the PR to try to repair the CI. |
I suppose that it's this PR:#134310. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.
LGTM
306f9e0
intopython:mainUh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
@vstinner We backported the tests for bytesarray, do you want to backport those tests as well? |
Thanks@abstractedfox for the PR, and@vstinner for merging it 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.14. |
Thanks@abstractedfox for the PR, and@vstinner for merging it 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.13. |
….py (pythonGH-134234)(cherry picked from commit306f9e0)Co-authored-by: abstractedfox <coldcaption@gmail.com>Co-authored-by: Victor Stinner <vstinner@python.org>
….py (pythonGH-134234)(cherry picked from commit306f9e0)Co-authored-by: abstractedfox <coldcaption@gmail.com>Co-authored-by: Victor Stinner <vstinner@python.org>
GH-134378 is a backport of this pull request to the3.14 branch. |
GH-134379 is a backport of this pull request to the3.13 branch. |
Sure. Let me backport these changes to 3.13 and 3.14 branches. |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Concerns issue#131357 and adds slightly more descriptive comments for a few functions that crash when passed null
capi
tests #131357