Matthieu Dartiailh

So the stack size indicated in the exception table does not account for the extra element that are pushed by the interpreter before the execution of the block start, right...

Hi @iritkatriel I made some progress by basing my analysis on the hypothesis that the entrance stack effect for a exception handler should be the minimum stack depth seen since...

Through some extra iterations I managed to get with statements working by special casing the impact of BEFORE_WITH and BEFORE_ASYNC_WITH. I expanded the set of test cases and I would...

What I found in an empirical manner was that the exception handling basic block for the instructions following a BEFORE_ instruction did not account for the return value of `__enter__`....

Digging more I found cases (test_cfg.py:::CFGStacksizeComputationTests::test_stack_size_computation_try_except_finally) where the above heuristic fails due to TryBegin/POP_BLOCK/TryEnd structure or similar. I came to the conclusion that if a TryBegin/TryEnd region sees a net...

The cfg tests are now passing !!! after yet another iteration on the stack computation that now badly needs to be refactored. Slowly we are getting there.

I prefer not to give you a date. My open source time has been limited lately (both for professional and personnal reasons) and even if this is my first priority,...

Currently everything should kind of work. But since I want to change the stacksize computation I think it makes sense for you to wait till I land this change. After...

@P403n1x87 I pushed the refactor of the stack size computation. So apart from the points still listed in the first comments, things should work. Feel free to test. @iritkatriel if...

And I will do my best to fix the regressions ASAP