ferringb

https://github.com/pkgcore/pkgcore/issues/327#issuecomment-1222522282 gives an example of the stack recursion that is occurring. Converting to async or generators may help.

First glance, change looks fine sans the error message being updated.

@mgorny I'm assuming this was an attempt to have another phase added? If so, update this w/ details/links (an issue link would be great) and I can take a look.

See https://github.com/pkgcore/pkgcore/issues/80#issuecomment-1364810858 ; the underlying issue was a combanitorial explosion for use transitive atoms. What I've traced, @arthurzam gets the credit for finally fixing that mess- assuming my tracing was...

@mgorny I don't expect much difference in view, but if PMS has expanded/covered this discussion above, I'd appreciated either a yay or nay so I can evaluate how to handle...

PR needs refreshing; as to pypy, I'm not opposed although I stopped tracking the status of it probably a decade back. More to the point: is this something that we...

Marking as "can't repro" at this point. My strong suspicion is either @arthurzam or @radhermit fixed the combinatorial explosion inherent in the transitive_use_atom parsing which was the cause of this....

@arthurzam my suspicion is this PR is no longer relevant due to the changes you/others made to the transitive use parsing. If I'm wrong on that, please reopen this PR...

Closing this out since it's a mix of resolver issues. The resolver *will* handle blockers, including exploring all possible ways around it. If anyone finds an exception to that- where...

Offhand, I'm not entirely in agreement that ':=' should be optimize out. Admittedly it makes fuck-all sense for `pquery`, but that's an explicit slot operator; the atom object shouldn't drop...