@@ -123,3 +123,7 @@ def expect_same(test_source, expected):
 expect_same("000000000000007", 7)
 expect_same("000000000000008.", 8.)
 expect_same("000000000000009.", 9.)
+
+# Verify treatment of unary minus on negative numbers SF bug #660455
+expect_same("0xffffffff", -1)
+expect_same("-0xffffffff", 1)
@@ -2,6 +2,18 @@ What's New in Python 2.2.3 ?
 Release date: XX-XXX-2003
 ============================
 
+- Through a bytecode optimizer bug (and I bet you didn't even know
+  Python *had* a bytecode optimizer :-), "unsigned" hex/oct constants
+  with a leading minus sign would come out with the wrong sign.
+  ("Unsigned" hex/oct constants are those with a face value in the
+  range sys.maxint+1 through sys.maxint*2+1, inclusive; these have
+  always been interpreted as negative numbers through sign folding.)
+  E.g. 0xffffffff is -1, and -(0xffffffff) is 1, but -0xffffffff would
+  come out as -4294967295.  This was the case in Python 2.2 through
+  2.2.2 and 2.3a1, and in Python 2.4 it will once again have that
+  value, but according to PEP 237 it really needs to be 1 in Python
+  2.2.3 and 2.3.  (SF #660455)
+
 - SF bug #678518:  fix some bugs in the parser module.  
 
 - Bastion.py and rexec.py are disabled.  These modules are not safe in
 
@@ -1952,7 +1952,8 @@ com_factor(struct compiling *c, node *n)
  	    && NCH(ppower) == 1
 	    && TYPE((patom = CHILD(ppower, 0))) == atom
 	    && TYPE((pnum = CHILD(patom, 0))) == NUMBER
-	    && !(childtype == MINUS && is_float_zero(STR(pnum)))) {
+	    && !(childtype == MINUS &&
+		 (STR(pnum)[0] == '0' || is_float_zero(STR(pnum))))) {
 		if (childtype == TILDE) {
 			com_invert_constant(c, pnum);
 			return;