Bug Report
Bug description:
In Python 3.15, dis reports the wrong jump target for FOR_ITER when the iterator is exhausted. The reported target lands on END_FOR, but the CPython runtime actually jumps one instruction past it to POP_ITER.
Root cause: In bytecodes.c, FOR_ITER uses JUMPBY(oparg + 1) to skip past END_FOR. However, dis computes the jump target as NIP + oparg * 2 bytes (without the +1), landing on END_FOR rather than POP_ITER.
import dis
def f():
for x in [1, 2, 3]:
pass
instrs = {i.offset: i for i in dis.get_instructions(f.__code__, show_caches=True)}
for i in dis.get_instructions(f.__code__):
if i.opname == "FOR_ITER":
for_iter = i
# dis reports this as the jump target:
reported_target = for_iter.jump_target
reported_name = instrs[reported_target].opname # "END_FOR"
# CPython runtime actually jumps here (oparg+1 instructions past NIP):
nip = for_iter.offset + 4 # 4 bytes = FOR_ITER word + CACHE word
actual_target = nip + (for_iter.arg + 1) * 2
actual_name = instrs[actual_target].opname # "POP_ITER"
print(f"dis reports: offset {reported_target} = {reported_name}") # END_FOR
print(f"runtime jumps: offset {actual_target} = {actual_name}") # POP_ITER
Output:
dis reports: offset 20 = END_FOR
runtime jumps: offset 22 = POP_ITER
The stack-effect model remains self-consistent (FOR_ITER +1, END_FOR -1, POP_ITER -2), but the reported jump target is misleading to any tool that builds a control-flow graph from dis output. The exhausted-iterator edge should point to POP_ITER, not END_FOR.
CPython versions tested on:
CPython main branch (3.15)
Operating systems tested on:
macOS
Linked PRs
Bug Report
Bug description:
In Python 3.15,
disreports the wrong jump target forFOR_ITERwhen the iterator is exhausted. The reported target lands onEND_FOR, but the CPython runtime actually jumps one instruction past it toPOP_ITER.Root cause: In
bytecodes.c,FOR_ITERusesJUMPBY(oparg + 1)to skip pastEND_FOR. However,discomputes the jump target asNIP + oparg * 2bytes (without the+1), landing onEND_FORrather thanPOP_ITER.Output:
The stack-effect model remains self-consistent (
FOR_ITER +1,END_FOR -1,POP_ITER -2), but the reported jump target is misleading to any tool that builds a control-flow graph fromdisoutput. The exhausted-iterator edge should point toPOP_ITER, notEND_FOR.CPython versions tested on:
CPython main branch (3.15)
Operating systems tested on:
macOS
Linked PRs