bpo-46724: Fix dis support for overflow args

[saulshanabrook]

This PR makes dis aware that currently Python's opargs wrap after a certain value. This is used in Python 3.10+ for code which includes negative args to represent negative jumps, like this:

while not (x < y < z):
    pass

which produces this dis output after this PR:

              0 RESUME                   0

  1           2 LOAD_NAME                0 (a)
              4 LOAD_NAME                1 (b)
              6 SWAP                     2
              8 COPY                     2
             10 COMPARE_OP               0 (<)
             12 POP_JUMP_IF_FALSE       11 (to 22)
             14 LOAD_NAME                2 (c)
             16 COMPARE_OP               0 (<)
             18 POP_JUMP_IF_TRUE        28 (to 56)
             20 JUMP_FORWARD             1 (to 24)
        >>   22 POP_TOP
        >>   24 LOAD_NAME                0 (a)
             26 LOAD_NAME                1 (b)
             28 SWAP                     2
             30 COPY                     2
             32 COMPARE_OP               0 (<)
             34 POP_JUMP_IF_FALSE       23 (to 46)
             36 LOAD_NAME                2 (c)
             38 COMPARE_OP               0 (<)
             40 POP_JUMP_IF_FALSE       12 (to 24)
             42 LOAD_CONST               0 (None)
             44 RETURN_VALUE
        >>   46 POP_TOP
             48 EXTENDED_ARG           255
             50 EXTENDED_ARG         65535
             52 EXTENDED_ARG         16777215
             54 JUMP_FORWARD           -16 (to 24)
        >>   56 LOAD_CONST               0 (None)
             58 RETURN_VALUE

Before this PR, the JUMP_FORWARD on line 54 had a huge value that did not match the Python interpreters behavior.

It is unclear to me whether producing this sort of bytecode is intended (I assume it's not), but at least with this fix the dis output more closes matches the current implementation.

https://bugs.python.org/issue46724

[the-knights-who-say-ni]

Hello, and thanks for your contribution!

I'm a bot set up to make sure that the project can legally accept this contribution by verifying everyone involved has signed the PSF contributor agreement (CLA).

CLA Missing

Our records indicate the following people have not signed the CLA:

@saulshanabrook

For legal reasons we need all the people listed to sign the CLA before we can look at your contribution. Please follow the steps outlined in the CPython devguide to rectify this issue.

If you have recently signed the CLA, please wait at least one business day
before our records are updated.

You can check yourself to see if the CLA has been received.

Thanks again for the contribution, we look forward to reviewing it!

[saulshanabrook]

@JelleZijlstra Thanks for taking a look.

Would you be able to approve the actions to run on this PR so I can see if the tests pass in CI?

[JelleZijlstra]

Sorry, I don't have that power.

[markshannon]

This is when it overflows, not the maximum value.
Rather than messing around with subtracting one, I'd recommend renaming this to _INT_OVERFLOW.
The math is sound.

[saulshanabrook]

Thanks for catching, fixed!

[markshannon]

One quibble about naming, otherwise looks good.

[JelleZijlstra]

I removed the review requests. In the future, it's better to merge main into the branch instead of rebasing.

Thanks for updating it, I can take another look at the PR later.

[saulshanabrook]

@JelleZijlstra thank you for removing them.

In the future, it's better to merge main into the branch instead of rebasing.

Will do.

[markshannon]

Thanks @saulshanabrook