Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork33.4k
bpo-36974: Fix GDB integration#13665
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
Merged
Merged
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
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
As it changes the way functions are called, the PEP 590 implementationskipped the functions that the GDB integration is looking for(by name) to find function calls.Looking for the new helper `cfunction_call_varargs` hopefully fixes thetests, and thus buildbots.The changed frame nuber in test_gdb is due to there being fewerC calls when calling a built-in method.
Contributor
jdemeyer commentedMay 29, 2019
Could you change this comment: |
MemberAuthor
encukou commentedMay 29, 2019 • 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.
I'm planning a follow-up with a better fix; I'll change the comment there. This is a quick patch to fix the buildbots. |
Contributor
jdemeyer commentedMay 29, 2019
Thanks a lot (assuming that this actually fixes the buildbots)! |
MemberAuthor
encukou commentedMay 29, 2019
It dit! 🎉 And#13668 is that follow-up. |
DinoV pushed a commit to DinoV/cpython that referenced this pull requestJan 14, 2020
As it changes the way functions are called, the PEP 590 implementationskipped the functions that the GDB integration is looking for(by name) to find function calls.Looking for the new helper `cfunction_call_varargs` hopefully fixes thetests, and thus buildbots.The changed frame nuber in test_gdb is due to there being fewerC calls when calling a built-in method.
Sign up for freeto 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.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
buildbot fix for#13185
As it changes the way functions are called, the PEP 590 implementation
skipped the functions that the GDB integration is looking for
(by name) to find function calls.
Looking for the new helper
cfunction_call_varargsshould fix buildbots.The changed frame nuber in test_gdb is due to there being fewer
C calls when calling a built-in funciton/method.
https://bugs.python.org/issue36974