on each iteration. I'm not positive this is the best way to handle
this. I'm also not sure that there aren't other cases where
the lnotab is generated incorrectly. It would be great if people
that use pdb or tracing could test heavily.
Also:
* Remove dead/duplicated code that wasn't used/necessary
because we already handled the docstring prior to entering the loop.
* add some debugging code into the compiler (#if 0'd out).
writing the crc to file on the "PPC64 Debian trunk" buildbot
when running test_tarfile.
This is again a case where the native zlib crc is an unsigned
32-bit int, but the Python wrapper implicitly casts it to
signed C long, so that "the sign bit looks different" on
different platforms.
buildbot (& possibly other 64-bit boxes) during test_gzip.
The native zlib crc32 function returns an unsigned 32-bit integer,
which the Python wrapper implicitly casts to C long. Therefore the
same crc can "look negative" on a 32-bit box but "look positive" on
a 64-bit box. This patch papers over that platform difference when
writing the crc to file.
It may be better to change the Python wrapper, either to make
the result "look positive" on all platforms (which means it may
have to return a Python long at times on a 32-bit box), or to
keep the sign the same across boxes. But that would be a visible
change in what users see, while the current hack changes no
visible behavior (well, apart from stopping the struct deprecation
warning).
Note that the module-level write32() function is no longer used.
Patch by Douglas Greiman.
The test_run_abort() testcase produces a core file on Unix systems,
even though the test is successful. This can be confusing or alarming
to someone who runs 'make test' and then finds that the Python
interpreter apparently crashed.
Is the explanation of the 'stacklevel' parameter clear? Please feel free
to edit it.
I don't have LaTeX installed on this machine, so haven't verified that the
markup is correct. Will check tonight, or maybe the automatic doc build will
tell me.
warning on Windows.
Afraid I can't detect a pattern to when the pack formats decide
to use a signed or unsigned format code -- appears nearly
arbitrary to my eyes. So I left all the pack formats alone and
changed the special-case data values instead.
warnings on Win32.
Also added an XXX about the line:
pos3 = self.fp.tell()
`pos3` is never referenced, and I have no idea what the code
intended to do instead.
