Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork33.3k
bpo-43950: Implement fine grained error locations for interactive mode#92827
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account
bpo-43950: Implement fine grained error locations for interactive mode#92827
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Conversation
pablogsal commentedMay 16, 2022
I'm confused. The original PR#27117 is still open, even if it is a draft and the original design questions already remain. Why have you opened another PR? Have you contacted@isidentical first to take his code/approach? We still need to decide if this is a good idea because this has drawbacks, which is one of the reasons we didn't pursue this originally. |
thatbirdguythatuknownot commentedMay 16, 2022 • edited
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
edited
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Alright, so I have to close this one? |
pablogsal commentedMay 16, 2022
Well, you don'thave to but the aspects and questions I have mentioned still stand. Particularly and most importantly, if you have taken code directly from#27117 then you need first to have the author's permission, otherwise, we won't be able to merge this even if we wanted. |
isidentical commentedMay 16, 2022
My PR can be used as a baseline, no worries on that end (though I have some reservations about the implementation, especially the new code field). |
pablogsal commentedMay 16, 2022
Yeah, that's what I dislike the most and I think this may make it a no-go. At the end of the day the reason we left it there was because the extra overhead and complexity was not worth the advantages as other reprls like Ipython will not even benefit from it. |
pablogsal commentedJun 4, 2022
After thinking about this I am -1 as the complexity introduced by this is quite high to just cover interactive mode. Unless@isidentical think otherwise, we should close this PR. Thanks@thatbirdguythatuknownot for the prototype and for persuing the idea. Unfortunately this is one of the cases where the complexity introduced unfortunately doesn't balance well with the feature. I think we could probably do it better in the future implementing interactive mode over temporary files |
thatbirdguythatuknownot commentedJun 4, 2022
Alright, I'll close this PR. |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading.Please reload this page.
Original issue number:#88116
Most of the implementation comes from#27117. Changes include new fields in the
compilerstruct (.c_source) and thePyCodeObjectobject (.co_source) to overcome the problem in the old PR by storing the source locally instead of globally. A newsourceargument was also added to_PyAST_Compile()to pass the source from the parser to the compiler.