fix inspect.getsource breaking with line-continuation & more

[simonpercivall]

BPO	1011890
Nosy	@simonpercivall
Files	inspect.py.diff: patch for inspect.py unittest_inspect.py: tests for patched behaviour test_inspect_oneliners.py: updated tests

^{Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.}

Show more details

GitHub fields:

assignee = None
closed_at = <Date 2005-03-09.11:22:13.000>
created_at = <Date 2004-08-19.01:11:10.000>
labels = ['library']
title = 'fix inspect.getsource breaking with line-continuation & more'
updated_at = <Date 2005-03-09.11:22:13.000>
user = 'https://github.com/simonpercivall'

bugs.python.org fields:

activity = <Date 2005-03-09.11:22:13.000>
actor = 'jlgijsbers'
assignee = 'jlgijsbers'
closed = True
closed_date = None
closer = None
components = ['Library (Lib)']
creation = <Date 2004-08-19.01:11:10.000>
creator = 'simon.percivall'
dependencies = []
files = ['6199', '6200', '6201']
hgrepos = []
issue_num = 1011890
keywords = ['patch']
message_count = 7.0
messages = ['46736', '46737', '46738', '46739', '46740', '46741', '46742']
nosy_count = 2.0
nosy_names = ['jlgijsbers', 'simon.percivall']
pr_nums = []
priority = 'normal'
resolution = 'accepted'
stage = None
status = 'closed'
superseder = None
type = None
url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue1011890'
versions = ['Python 2.4']

[simonpercivall]

The patch makes changes to inspect.py in two places:

• the pattern to match against functions at line 436 is
  modified: lambdas should be matched even if not
  preceded by whitespace, as long as "lambda" isn't part
  of another word.

• the BlockFinder class is heavily modified. Changes are:

  • checking for "def", "class" or "lambda" names
    before setting self.started to True. Then checking the
    same line for word characters after the colon (if the
    colon is on that line). If so, and the line does not
    end with a line continuation marker, raise EndOfBlock
    immediately.
  • adding self.passline to show that the line is to be
    included and no more checking is necessary on that
    line. Since a NEWLINE token is not generated when a
    line continuation marker exists, this allows getsource
    to continue with these functions even if the following
    line would not be indented.

The patch might be making a mess of the simple code,
and code such as code it now handles will probably not
be seen often. Still, it fixes the first bug shown in
"www.python.org/sf/769569".

[simonpercivall]

Logged In: YES
user_id=329382

BTW: inspect.py CVS HEAD passes three of the tests:
test_oll, test_tlli and test_onelinefunc.

[jlgijsbers]

Logged In: YES
user_id=469548

Looks very good. I've made some small changes:

• Moved the __main__ section into a test_main() block for
  running by regrtest.py
• Used the run_unittest function from test_support.py
• De-abbreviated some of the test methods
• Used comments instead of docstrings: unittest prints the
  docstring of a test method instead of the name of the test
  method when failing, making the failing method harder to find.

Apart from that, it looks like checkin-quality to me. Still,
it's kind of ugly to have a two separate files and two
separate methods for testing the same module, so I guess
that means I'll be converting test_inspect to unittest. I'll
try to work on that tonight and post it to
http://python.org/sf/736962 tomorrow. I'll merge these tests
into the new test_inspect after it's checked in.

[jlgijsbers]

Logged In: YES
user_id=469548

Well, it took a bit longer to get test_inspect ported to
unittest, but it's done now. I've also checked this in.
Thanks for the patch!

[simonpercivall]

Logged In: YES
user_id=329382

Shouldn't this be considered a bug fix though? What I mean is: Shouldn't
the patch also be checked in to the 2.4 maintain branch? Perhaps the
ported test_inspect is a problem, but the patch itself ...

[jlgijsbers]

Logged In: YES
user_id=469548

Sorry for getting to this so late, but it's still before
2.4.1, right? I've checked in the patch as rev. 1.58.2.1.

[jlgijsbers]

Logged In: YES
user_id=469548

Simon, do you have the time to look at
http://python.org/sf/1143895? The patch has broken one
simple case and I really don't have the time to look into it.