Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: > That way a virtual sequence with PY_SSIZE_T_MAX-1 items would still work > (instead of failing unexpectedly).
Actually with PY_SSIZE_T_MAX+1 items (indices from 0 to PY_SSIZE_T_MAX inclusive). If Raymond insists I can write more complicated patch, but I don't think that we should complicate the code for this pretty hypotetical case. I'm for committing issue22939v2.patch. ---------- status: open -> pending _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue22939> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
