Message 312485 - Python tracker

➜

This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author	serhiy.storchaka
Recipients	serhiy.storchaka
Date	2018-02-21.09:56:21
SpamBayes Score	-1.0
Marked as misclassified	Yes
Message-id	<[email protected]>
In-reply-to

Content
Currently ast.literal_eval() accepts AST representing expressions like "+True" or "True+2j" if constants are represented as Constant. This is because the type of the value is tested with `isinstance(left, (int, float))` and since bool is a subclass of int it passes this test. The proposed PR makes ast.literal_eval() using tests for exact type. I don't think it is worth backporting since it affects only passing AST to ast.literal_eval(). Usually ast.literal_eval() is used for evaluating strings.

Currently ast.literal_eval() accepts AST representing expressions like "+True" or "True+2j" if constants are represented as Constant. This is because the type of the value is tested with `isinstance(left, (int, float))` and since bool is a subclass of int it passes this test.

The proposed PR makes ast.literal_eval() using tests for exact type. I don't think it is worth backporting since it affects only passing AST to ast.literal_eval(). Usually ast.literal_eval() is used for evaluating strings.

History
Date	User	Action	Args
2018-02-21 09:56:21	serhiy.storchaka	set	recipients: + serhiy.storchaka
2018-02-21 09:56:21	serhiy.storchaka	set	messageid: <[email protected]>
2018-02-21 09:56:21	serhiy.storchaka	link	issue32893 messages
2018-02-21 09:56:21	serhiy.storchaka	create