Alternate fix for complex() parsing #17384
Closed
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
Signed-off-by: Jeff Epler <jepler@gmail.com>
If a complex literal had a negative real part and a positive complex part, it was not parsed properly. Co-Authored-By: ComplexSymbol <141301057+ComplexSymbol@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: Jeff Epler <jepler@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Epler <jepler@gmail.com>
|
Code size report: |
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #17384 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 98.54% 98.54%
=======================================
Files 169 169
Lines 21898 21903 +5
=======================================
+ Hits 21579 21584 +5
Misses 319 319 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
dpgeorge
reviewed
May 29, 2025
|
When the CI passes, let's see how big the code size change is. |
A sign character is now required when a literal passed to complex() has both a real and imaginary part. Signed-off-by: Jeff Epler <jepler@gmail.com>
64ddc9f to
e8d0098
Compare
|
Updated. I have seen this technique used but since I didn't see a diagnostic on the unix build (which allows it as an extension) I didn't realize it was needed here. Future gcc will have a way to enable a diagnostic about this incorrect label usage even when not running in pedantic mode: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2024-November/669243.html |
|
Thanks for opening this for a comparison with #17383. Considering the relatively large increase in code size, I'll close this in favour of #17383. At least with this PR, |
|
Makes perfect sense, thanks! |
jepler
added a commit
to jepler/circuitpython
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 10, 2025
In micropython#17384 it was decided that fixing this difference was not worth the code size increase.
jepler
added a commit
to jepler/circuitpython
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 10, 2025
In micropython#17384 it was decided that fixing this difference was not worth the code size increase.
jepler
added a commit
to jepler/circuitpython
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 10, 2025
In micropython#17384 it was decided that fixing this difference was not worth the code size increase. Signed-off-by: Jeff Epler <jepler@gmail.com>
jepler
added a commit
to jepler/circuitpython
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 16, 2025
In micropython#17384 it was decided that fixing this difference was not worth the code size increase. Signed-off-by: Jeff Epler <jepler@gmail.com>
dpgeorge
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 16, 2025
In #17384 it was decided that fixing this difference was not worth the code size increase. So document it instead. Signed-off-by: Jeff Epler <jepler@gmail.com>
Josverl
pushed a commit
to Josverl/micropython
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 19, 2025
In micropython#17384 it was decided that fixing this difference was not worth the code size increase. So document it instead. Signed-off-by: Jeff Epler <jepler@gmail.com>
aivarannamaa
pushed a commit
to progering/micropython
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 9, 2025
In micropython#17384 it was decided that fixing this difference was not worth the code size increase. So document it instead. Signed-off-by: Jeff Epler <jepler@gmail.com>
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.
In contrast to #17383 this one also fixes parsing for
complex("1 1j")where a sign character does not occur between the real and imaginary parts of a number with both parts. It almost certainly makes the code grow more. Please feel free to close this if the code growth isn't worth the benefit. If so, a section should probably be added to the difference page in the docs.