gh-92019: Make sqlite3.Blob indexing conform with the norm

[erlend-aasland]

• get index now returns an int
• set index now requires an int in range(0, 256)

Resolves #92019

[ghost]

All commit authors signed the Contributor License Agreement.

[erlend-aasland]

All commit authors signed the Contributor License Agreement.

FTR, I've changed the email address I'm using for CPython, from my work address to my private address.

[erlend-aasland]

I'm not sure this needs a NEWS item; the blob interface has not been part of an official release yet.

[JelleZijlstra]

Thank you for the quick change! I'll take a closer look soon. I don't think it needs a NEWS entry because the current behavior wasn't released in any alpha.

[JelleZijlstra]

Also, something wrong on Windows:

FAIL: test_blob_set_item_negative_index (test.test_sqlite3.test_dbapi.BlobTests.test_blob_set_item_negative_index)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "D:\a\cpython\cpython\Lib\test\test_sqlite3\test_dbapi.py", line 1210, in test_blob_set_item_negative_index
    self.assertEqual(self.blob[-1], 255)
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
AssertionError: 36281599 != 255

[erlend-aasland]

Also, something wrong on Windows:

I'm on it 🕵🏻

UPDATE: fixed in 1badacb

[bedevere-bot]

🤖 New build scheduled with the buildbot fleet by @JelleZijlstra for commit a713df6 🤖

If you want to schedule another build, you need to add the ":hammer: test-with-buildbots" label again.

[bedevere-bot]

🤖 New build scheduled with the buildbot fleet by @erlend-aasland for commit 6400ec5 🤖

If you want to schedule another build, you need to add the ":hammer: test-with-buildbots" label again.

[bedevere-bot]

🤖 New build scheduled with the buildbot fleet by @erlend-aasland for commit b0fc557 🤖

If you want to schedule another build, you need to add the ":hammer: test-with-buildbots" label again.

[JelleZijlstra]

One buildbot failed on FAIL: test_finalize_structseq (test.test_embed.EmbeddingTests.test_finalize_structseq), I think that's a known spurious failure. A few others are still running.