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.

作者 pitrou
收信人 Arach, Arfrever, Huzaifa.Sidhpurwala, Jim.Jewett, Mark.Shannon, PaulMcMillan, Zhiping.Deng, alex, barry, benjamin.peterson, christian.heimes, dmalcolm, eric.araujo, eric.snow, fx5, georg.brandl, grahamd, gregory.p.smith, gvanrossum, gz, jcea, lemburg, mark.dickinson, neologix, pitrou, skrah, terry.reedy, tim.peters, v+python, vstinner, zbysz
日期 2012-01-21.14:27:09
SpamBayes Score 9.451976e-05
Marked as misclassified
Message-id <1327155912.3382.4.camel@localhost.localdomain>
In-reply-to <1327115744.4992.180.camel@surprise>
内容
> Thoughts? (apart from "ugh! it's ugly!" yes I know - it's late here)

Is it guaranteed that no usage pattern can render this protection
inefficient? What if a dict is constructed by intermingling lookups and
inserts?
Similarly, what happens with e.g. the common use case of
dictdefault(list), where you append() after the lookup/insert? Does some
key distribution allow the attack while circumventing the protection?
历史
日期 用户 动作 参数
2012-01-21 14:27:10pitrou修改recipients: + pitrou, lemburg, gvanrossum, tim.peters, barry, georg.brandl, terry.reedy, gregory.p.smith, jcea, mark.dickinson, vstinner, christian.heimes, benjamin.peterson, eric.araujo, grahamd, Arfrever, v+python, alex, zbysz, skrah, dmalcolm, gz, neologix, Arach, Mark.Shannon, eric.snow, Zhiping.Deng, Huzaifa.Sidhpurwala, Jim.Jewett, PaulMcMillan, fx5
2012-01-21 14:27:09pitrou链接issue13703 messages
2012-01-21 14:27:09pitrou创建