Skip to content

bpo-23689: re module, fix memory leak when a match is terminated by a signal or memory allocation failure #32283

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.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
serhiy-storchaka merged 11 commits into from Apr 3, 2022
Merged

bpo-23689: re module, fix memory leak when a match is terminated by a signal or memory allocation failure #32283

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
11 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
e5317fe
1. add variables
wjssz Apr 3, 2022
28e4d2d
2. add _CompileData class to _compile.py
wjssz Apr 3, 2022
7493fad
3. add repeat_count parameter to _sre.compile() function
wjssz Apr 3, 2022
b928335
4. emit repeat_count in sre_compile.py
wjssz Apr 3, 2022
dfec05d
5. change _validate_outer() parameter
wjssz Apr 3, 2022
db7e88b
6. validate in _validate_inner() / _validate_outer()
wjssz Apr 3, 2022
a43cb6e
7. allocate repeats_array for SRE_STATE
wjssz Apr 3, 2022
1560a0c
8. support code in sre_lib.h
wjssz Apr 3, 2022
96be025
9. add unit-tests
wjssz Apr 3, 2022
7ee3e66
a. skip -= field_number
wjssz Apr 3, 2022
e95b19f
b. improve unit-test
wjssz Apr 3, 2022
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Prev Previous commit
b. improve unit-test
  • Loading branch information
@wjssz
wjssz committed Apr 3, 2022
commit e95b19f63d36ede3525303e5363738d206083d47
6 changes: 3 additions & 3 deletions Lib/test/test_re.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -2338,8 +2338,8 @@ def test_possesive_repeat(self):
''')

def test_repeat_index(self):
self.assertEqual(get_debug_out(r'(?:ab)*(?:cd)*'), '''\
MAX_REPEAT 0 MAXREPEAT
self.assertEqual(get_debug_out(r'(?:ab)*?(?:cd)*'), '''\
MIN_REPEAT 0 MAXREPEAT
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@serhiy-storchaka serhiy-storchaka Apr 3, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You just read my mind! I was going to propose such a change, but I thought that I was already bothering you too much.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

@ghost ghost Apr 3, 2022 •
edited by ghost
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I just thought this after posting this PR.

I thought that I was already bothering you too much.

As an inactive contributor, this is not a matter.
I'm not practised, so need continuously improve the patch to get to a good state.
When I think it's good, I can always find its shortcomings afterwards.

I have only one question: how to prove that we need only one SRE_REPEAT structure per the REPEAT code?

I have to think about how to answer your question.

LITERAL 97
LITERAL 98
MAX_REPEAT 0 MAXREPEAT
Expand All @@ -2350,7 +2350,7 @@ def test_repeat_index(self):
5: REPEAT 8 0 MAXREPEAT 0 (to 14)
10. LITERAL 0x61 ('a')
12. LITERAL 0x62 ('b')
14: MAX_UNTIL
14: MIN_UNTIL
15. REPEAT 8 0 MAXREPEAT 1 (to 24)
20. LITERAL 0x63 ('c')
22. LITERAL 0x64 ('d')
Expand Down