This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author anthony shaw
Recipients anthony shaw, ncoghlan
Date 2019-03-25.00:00:56
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1553472056.29.0.688225518527.issue36420@roundup.psfhosted.org>
In-reply-to
Content
The f_trace_opcodes flag for sys.settrace in 3.7 are proving tricky. 

I must be missing something but it's not clear how it helps in tracing the opcode about to be executed because it runs before opcode and oparg variables are set by NEXTOPARG(), so the only way to establish the opcode is to look at the frame code and work out the next instruction in the stack.

The documentation references dis, but if you call that for a traceback or using the frame code, you only have the last instruction, not the next one?

def trace(frame, event, args):
  frame.f_trace_opcodes = True
  if event == 'opcode':
    disassemble(frame.f_code, frame.f_lasti)
  return frame

It looks like the emitting of the opcode event needs to come after NEXTOPARG(), but that means if the tracing function were to add any instructions to the stack, that would no longer work. 
Alternatively, the opcode could be calculated and added as an argument.
History
Date User Action Args
2019-03-25 00:00:56anthony shawsetrecipients: + anthony shaw, ncoghlan
2019-03-25 00:00:56anthony shawsetmessageid: <1553472056.29.0.688225518527.issue36420@roundup.psfhosted.org>
2019-03-25 00:00:56anthony shawlinkissue36420 messages
2019-03-25 00:00:56anthony shawcreate