[Python-3000] Should 2to3 point out possible, but not definite changes? (original) (raw)
Adrian Holovaty adrian at holovaty.com
Fri Aug 24 04:50:16 CEST 2007
- Previous message: [Python-3000] make uuid.py creation threadsafe
- Next message: [Python-3000] Should 2to3 point out *possible*, but not definite changes?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
As part of the Python 3000 sprint (at Google's Chicago office), I've been working on the documentation for 2to3. I'm publishing updates at http://red-bean.com/~adrian/2to3.rst and will submit this as a documentation patch when it's completed. (I didn't get as much done today as I would have liked, but I'll be back at it Friday.)
In my research of the 2to3 utility, I've been thinking about whether it should be expanded to include the equivalent of "warnings." I know one of its design goals has been to be "dumb but correct," but I propose that including optional warnings would be a bit smarter/helpful, without risking the tool's correctness.
Specifically, I propose:
2to3 gains either an "--include-warnings" option or an "--exclude-warnings" option, depending on which behavior is decided to be default.
If this option is set, the utility would search for an additional set of fixes -- fixes that might need to be made to the code but cannot be determined with certainty. An example of this is noted in the "Limitations" section of the 2to3 README:
a = apply a(f, *args)
(2to3 cannot handle this because it cannot detect reassignment.)
Under my proposal, the utility would notice that "apply" is a builtin whose behavior is changing, and that this is a situation in which the correct 2to3 porting is ambiguous. The utility would designate this in the output with a Python comment on the previous line:
# 2to3note: The semantics of apply() have changed.
a = apply
a(f, *args)Each comment would have a common prefix such as "2to3note" for easy grepping.
Given the enormity of the Python 3000 syntax change, I think that the 2to3 utility should provide as much guidance as possible. What it does currently is extremely cool (I daresay miraculous), but I think we can get closer to 100% coverage if we take into account the ambiguous changes.
Oh, and I'm happy to (attempt to) write this addition to the tool, as long as the powers at be deem it worthwhile.
Thoughts?
Adrian
-- Adrian Holovaty holovaty.com | djangoproject.com
- Previous message: [Python-3000] make uuid.py creation threadsafe
- Next message: [Python-3000] Should 2to3 point out *possible*, but not definite changes?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]