Skip to content
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 our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

AST literal_eval exceptions provide no information about line number #73150

Closed
stevemer mannequin opened this issue Dec 13, 2016 · 13 comments
Closed

AST literal_eval exceptions provide no information about line number #73150

stevemer mannequin opened this issue Dec 13, 2016 · 13 comments
Labels
3.10 only security fixes stdlib Python modules in the Lib dir type-feature A feature request or enhancement

Comments

@stevemer
Copy link
Mannequin

stevemer mannequin commented Dec 13, 2016

BPO 28964
Nosy @berkerpeksag, @serhiy-storchaka, @stevemer, @mlouielu, @mbdevpl, @pablogsal, @isidentical, @iritkatriel
PRs
  • bpo-28964: add line number of node (if available) to ast.literal_eval… #23677
    		•
    Files
  • mywork.patch
    		•

    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 2020-12-25.17:05:11.980>
created_at = <Date 2016-12-13.21:47:44.235>
labels = ['type-feature', 'library', '3.10']
title = 'AST literal_eval exceptions provide no information about line number'
updated_at = <Date 2020-12-27.17:27:50.879>
user = 'https://github.com/stevemer'

    bugs.python.org fields:

    activity = <Date 2020-12-27.17:27:50.879>
actor = 'stevemerritt'
assignee = 'none'
closed = True
closed_date = <Date 2020-12-25.17:05:11.980>
closer = 'BTaskaya'
components = ['Library (Lib)']
creation = <Date 2016-12-13.21:47:44.235>
creator = 'stevemerritt'
dependencies = []
files = ['45879']
hgrepos = []
issue_num = 28964
keywords = ['patch']
message_count = 13.0
messages = ['283142', '284419', '284422', '284430', '292330', '292381', '377110', '382630', '382631', '383587', '383589', '383754', '383854']
nosy_count = 8.0
nosy_names = ['berker.peksag', 'serhiy.storchaka', 'stevemerritt', 'louielu', 'mbdevpl', 'pablogsal', 'BTaskaya', 'iritkatriel']
pr_nums = ['23677']
priority = 'normal'
resolution = 'fixed'
stage = 'resolved'
status = 'closed'
superseder = None
type = 'enhancement'
url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue28964'
versions = ['Python 3.10']
    @stevemer
    Copy link
    Mannequin Author

    stevemer mannequin commented Dec 13, 2016

    Without line numbers, debugging syntax errors in large documents is a tedious and painful process.

    @stevemer stevemer mannequin added type-bug An unexpected behavior, bug, or error stdlib Python modules in the Lib dir labels Dec 13, 2016
    @berkerpeksag
    Copy link
    Member

    Thanks for the patch, Steve!.

    This looks like a reasonable request to me, but 1) we can only make this change in 3.7 2) we need a test case for the new message 3) you can use f-strings instead of str.format()

    @berkerpeksag berkerpeksag added 3.7 (EOL) end of life type-feature A feature request or enhancement and removed type-bug An unexpected behavior, bug, or error labels Jan 1, 2017
    @serhiy-storchaka
    Copy link
    Member

    Usually literal_eval() is used with short one-line input. For what large documents do you use it?

    @stevemer
    Copy link
    Mannequin Author

    stevemer mannequin commented Jan 1, 2017

    We're using Python dictionaries to express sizeable (read: 100-600 lines)
    chunks of configuration data. We previously used JSON, but we now use
    Jinja2 to template chunks of this configuration data, and JSON's inability
    to handle trailing commas creates a problem here. So we've been using
    ast.literal_eval, but the lack of line numbers makes debugging problems
    with the configurations a painful process.

    On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 2:41 AM Serhiy Storchaka <report@bugs.python.org>
    wrote:

    Serhiy Storchaka added the comment:

    Usually literal_eval() is used with short one-line input. For what large
    documents do you use it?

    ----------
    nosy: +serhiy.storchaka

    Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
    <http://bugs.python.org/issue28964\>

    @mlouielu
    Copy link
    Mannequin

    mlouielu mannequin commented Apr 26, 2017

    Steve, will you work on this patch to GitHub?

    @stevemer
    Copy link
    Mannequin Author

    stevemer mannequin commented Apr 26, 2017

    I'll try to get to it this weekend. A bit swamped on another project right now. Thanks for the interest and the reminder!

    @iritkatriel
    Copy link
    Member

    Steve, are you planning to work on porting this patch to github?

    Note: it would need a unit test, and also node is not guaranteed to have a lineno field.

    @isidentical
    Copy link
    Sponsor Member

    Usually literal_eval() is used with short one-line input. For what large documents do you use it?

    I kind of agree with Serhiy on this, nearly every use case I've encountered was simple, single-line expression. Though, by seeing Irit's patch I think the implementation is reasonable enough to do.

    @iritkatriel
    Copy link
    Member

    This just came up again in bpo-42561 so I went ahead and created the PR.

    @iritkatriel iritkatriel added 3.10 only security fixes and removed 3.7 (EOL) end of life labels Dec 7, 2020
    @isidentical
    Copy link
    Sponsor Member

    I'm +0 on this (even though we only had 2 users wanting this, the implementation seems very trivial). @serhiy.storchaka, @pablogsal any opinions?

    @pablogsal
    Copy link
    Member

    This is a recurring feature request (I have heard people asking for this a couple of times) and is simple enough to do, so I am fine with this. Unless Serhiy has some concern, I would go forward :)

    @isidentical
    Copy link
    Sponsor Member

    New changeset 586f3db by Irit Katriel in branch 'master':
    bpo-28964: add line number of node (if available) to ast.literal_eval error messages (GH-23677)
    586f3db

    @stevemer
    Copy link
    Mannequin Author

    stevemer mannequin commented Dec 27, 2020

    Thank you!

    On Fri, Dec 25, 2020 at 11:05 AM Batuhan Taskaya <report@bugs.python.org>
    wrote:

    Change by Batuhan Taskaya <isidentical@gmail.com>:

    ----------
    resolution: -> fixed
    stage: patch review -> resolved
    status: open -> closed

    Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
    <https://bugs.python.org/issue28964\>

    @ezio-melotti ezio-melotti transferred this issue from another repository Apr 10, 2022
    Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
    Assignees
    No one assigned
    Labels
    3.10 only security fixes stdlib Python modules in the Lib dir type-feature A feature request or enhancement
    Projects
    None yet
    Milestone
    No milestone
    Development

    No branches or pull requests
    5 participants
    @berkerpeksag @iritkatriel @serhiy-storchaka @pablogsal @isidentical