Unknown test comment

[Yay295]

What is "bug-200802-systemerror"?

Pillow/Tests/test_image_putdata.py

Lines 32 to 46 in f8160b8

	def test_long_integers() -> None:
	# see bug-200802-systemerror
	def put(value: int) -> tuple[int, int, int, int]:
	im = Image.new("RGBA", (1, 1))
	im.putdata([value])
	return im.getpixel((0, 0))
	assert put(0xFFFFFFFF) == (255, 255, 255, 255)
	assert put(0xFFFFFFFF) == (255, 255, 255, 255)
	assert put(-1) == (255, 255, 255, 255)
	assert put(-1) == (255, 255, 255, 255)
	if sys.maxsize > 2**32:
	assert put(sys.maxsize) == (255, 255, 255, 255)
	else:
	assert put(sys.maxsize) == (255, 255, 255, 127)

@cgohlke This comes all the way from your original tests. I don't suppose you remember what this was?

[hugovk]

There's an archive of the old Mercurial repo at https://bitbucket-archive.softwareheritage.org/projects/ef/effbot/pil-2009-raclette.html

I have a copy at https://github.com/hugovk/pil-2009-raclette

The commit is "Handle long integers in putpixel/putdata." by Fredrik aka effbot on Apr 25, 2010:

hugovk/pil-2009-raclette@52970c6

Maybe you can find something in the repo metadata at softwareheritage.

[Yay295]

Oh, interesting. It looks like the L suffixes were probably removed when going from Python 2 to 3, which is why there are some duplicate lines in that test now.

[nulano]

Checking the metadata archive from https://bitbucket-archive.softwareheritage.org/projects/ef/effbot/pil-2009-raclette.html, I get no hits with grep for "systemerror", "putpixel", nor "putdata".

I've also tried checking the Image-SIG mailing list archive, but I can't see anything relevant.

[nulano]

The commit is "Handle long integers in putpixel/putdata." by Fredrik aka effbot on Apr 25, 2010:
hugovk/pil-2009-raclette@52970c6

The Pillow version of that commit is c8ce29c from #35:

FIX: Handle long values in _imaging getink

This gets the putdata test case to run correctly under 2.6/2.7. It fixes an
issue where the value 0xFFFFFFFF (which is long in old Python) isn't
recognized and putdata tries to parse it as a tuple.

The original fix comes from Christoph Gohlke. It was adapted to work in
both 2.* and 3.*.

[Yay295]

That seems like the answer to me. I don't know what the exact error report was, but it looks like it was something to do with big numbers and Python 2/3 compatibility.

[radarhere]

#8017 now suggests removing this comment.