Issue a warning when int('0...', 0) returns an int with the sign
folded; this will change in Python 2.4. On a 32-bit machine, this
happens for 0x80000000 through 0xffffffff, and for octal constants in
the same value range. No warning is issued if an explicit base is
given, *or* if the string contains a sign (since in those cases no
sign folding ever happens).
diff --git a/Misc/NEWS b/Misc/NEWS
index 8a6e902..f1b3a8b 100644
--- a/Misc/NEWS
+++ b/Misc/NEWS
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
*Release date: XX-XXX-2003*
Core and builtins
------------------
+----------------
- Through a bytecode optimizer bug (and I bet you didn't even know
Python *had* a bytecode optimizer :-), "unsigned" hex/oct constants
@@ -24,6 +24,13 @@
value, but according to PEP 237 it really needs to be 1 now. This
will be backported to Python 2.2.3 a well. (SF #660455)
+- int(s, base) sometimes sign-folds hex and oct constants; it only
+ does this when base is 0 and s.strip() starts with a '0'. When the
+ sign is actually folded, as in int("0xffffffff", 0) on a 32-bit
+ machine, which returns -1, a FutureWarning is now issued; in Python
+ 2.4, this will return 4294967295L, as do int("+0xffffffff", 0) and
+ int("0xffffffff", 16) right now. (PEP 347)
+
- super(X, x): x may now be a proxy for an X instance, i.e.
issubclass(x.__class__, X) but not issubclass(type(x), X).