Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #86345 > unrolled thread

Bug in timsort!?

Started byRoy Smith <roy@panix.com>
First post2015-02-24 13:34 -0800
Last post2015-02-26 09:33 +0200
Articles 4 on this page of 44 — 22 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python

Contents

  Bug in timsort!? Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2015-02-24 13:34 -0800
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Zachary Ware <zachary.ware+pylist@gmail.com> - 2015-02-24 15:40 -0600
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-02-24 21:49 +0000
      Re: Bug in timsort!? sohcahtoa82@gmail.com - 2015-02-24 14:36 -0800
        Re: Bug in timsort!? Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-02-25 00:38 +0000
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-02-24 22:45 +0000
      Re: Bug in timsort!? Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-02-24 15:59 -0700
      Re: Bug in timsort!? Robert Kern <robert.kern@gmail.com> - 2015-02-25 11:34 +0000
        Re: Bug in timsort!? Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2015-02-25 15:49 +0000
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-02-25 10:33 +1100
    Re: Bug in timsort!? MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2015-02-24 23:38 +0000
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Skip Montanaro <skip.montanaro@gmail.com> - 2015-02-24 17:50 -0600
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-02-25 11:07 +1100
      Re: Bug in timsort!? Paddy <paddy3118@gmail.com> - 2015-02-25 01:10 -0800
        Re: Bug in timsort!? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-02-25 21:11 +1100
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Chris Kaynor <ckaynor@zindagigames.com> - 2015-02-24 16:38 -0800
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-02-24 21:52 -0500
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Dave Angel <davea@davea.name> - 2015-02-24 21:41 -0500
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Ned Deily <nad@acm.org> - 2015-02-25 01:04 -0800
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> - 2015-02-25 14:58 +0100
      Re: Bug in timsort!? alister <alister.nospam.ware@ntlworld.com> - 2015-02-25 15:03 +0000
        Re: Bug in timsort!? Zachary Ware <zachary.ware+pylist@gmail.com> - 2015-02-25 09:23 -0600
        Re: Bug in timsort!? Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2015-02-25 16:08 -0500
      Re: Bug in timsort!? Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2015-02-25 19:12 -0500
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Jonas Wielicki <jonas@wielicki.name> - 2015-02-25 15:07 +0100
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-02-26 01:33 +1100
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> - 2015-02-25 16:05 +0100
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-02-26 02:11 +1100
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2015-02-25 17:04 +0100
      Re: Bug in timsort!? Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-02-25 18:22 +0100
        Re: Bug in timsort!? Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> - 2015-02-25 19:41 +0100
        Re: Bug in timsort!? Jonas Wielicki <jonas@wielicki.name> - 2015-02-25 19:46 +0100
        Re: Bug in timsort!? Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-02-25 20:07 +0000
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Sturla Molden <sturla.molden@gmail.com> - 2015-02-25 17:44 +0100
      Re: Bug in timsort!? Mario Figueiredo <marfig@gmail.com> - 2015-02-25 18:29 +0100
      Re: Bug in timsort!? Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2015-02-26 10:13 +1100
        Re: Bug in timsort!? Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-02-25 22:51 -0700
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-02-25 16:50 +0000
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-02-25 16:55 +0000
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Chris Kaynor <ckaynor@zindagigames.com> - 2015-02-25 08:56 -0800
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-02-26 04:18 +1100
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2015-02-25 18:21 +0100
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-02-25 12:42 -0700
    Re: Bug in timsort!? Serhiy Storchaka <storchaka@gmail.com> - 2015-02-26 09:33 +0200

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

#86426

FromChris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>
Date2015-02-26 04:18 +1100
Message-ID<mailman.19205.1424884730.18130.python-list@python.org>
In reply to#86345
On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 3:56 AM, Chris Kaynor <ckaynor@zindagigames.com> wrote:
> so
> CPython should now be able to handle infinite length arrays (once we
> can build computers with that much storage...).

Don't we have a Turing Machine buildbot?

ChrisA

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#86427

FromPeter Otten <__peter__@web.de>
Date2015-02-25 18:21 +0100
Message-ID<mailman.19206.1424884915.18130.python-list@python.org>
In reply to#86345
Mark Lawrence wrote:

> Reading the bug report http://bugs.python.org/issue23515, specifically
> msg236586, it looks as if the proposed fix was wrong and one of the
> smarter members of the python community fixed it.

If I understand that correctly Benjamin's modifications don't affect the 
functionality of the patch.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#86436

FromIan Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com>
Date2015-02-25 12:42 -0700
Message-ID<mailman.19212.1424893367.18130.python-list@python.org>
In reply to#86345
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> wrote:
> Mark Lawrence wrote:
>
>> Reading the bug report http://bugs.python.org/issue23515, specifically
>> msg236586, it looks as if the proposed fix was wrong and one of the
>> smarter members of the python community fixed it.
>
> If I understand that correctly Benjamin's modifications don't affect the
> functionality of the patch.

Yeah, just looks like some changes for code clarity to me.

Py_ssize_t is signed, so the n-1 > 0 test wouldn't break on n = 0. The
other changes are pure formatting.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#86481

FromSerhiy Storchaka <storchaka@gmail.com>
Date2015-02-26 09:33 +0200
Message-ID<mailman.19246.1424935994.18130.python-list@python.org>
In reply to#86345
On 25.02.15 18:56, Chris Kaynor wrote:
> While the CPython implementation was only broken for arrays of length
> larger than 2**49, aka, practically not broken, the Java
> implementation (such as used on Android phones) was broken with arrays
> of length > 67,108,864 at the time the post was made. While still very
> large, an array of 67 million elements is well within the realm of
> possibility today. The Java fixes (so far) have only extended the
> number out, rather than actually fix the underlying problem - the
> CPython fixes that were committed implement the full proven fix, so
> CPython should now be able to handle infinite length arrays (once we
> can build computers with that much storage...).

No, it is limited to arrays with length < about 2**64.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python

csiph-web