Issue2505
Created on 2008-03-29 13:38 by georg.brandl, last changed 2022-04-11 14:56 by admin. This issue is now closed.
| Files | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| File name | Uploaded | Description | Edit | |
| ast-attrs.diff | georg.brandl, 2008-03-29 13:38 | |||
| ast-constructor-v2.diff | georg.brandl, 2008-03-29 18:31 | |||
| Messages (6) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| msg64691 - (view) | Author: Georg Brandl (georg.brandl) * ![]() |
Date: 2008-03-29 13:38 | |
This patch adds two things to the _ast module: * Nodes can be initialized with keyword arguments: m = _ast.Module(body=[...]) * Only attributes that are in _fields or _attributes can be set on nodes. Martin, what do you think? |
|||
| msg64693 - (view) | Author: Georg Brandl (georg.brandl) * ![]() |
Date: 2008-03-29 13:40 | |
On second thought, restricting node attributes may prevent custom AST processing tools from adding useful information themselves... |
|||
| msg64700 - (view) | Author: Martin v. Löwis (loewis) * ![]() |
Date: 2008-03-29 14:49 | |
> On second thought, restricting node attributes may prevent custom AST > processing tools from adding useful information themselves... Indeed. If anything is to be checked, it should be whether the child nodes or attributes have the right types. However, that should rather be done in a recursive check function on _mod, which then would also check whether all necessary fields have been set. Or, such checks could be delayed until actual compilation of the tree is attempted (i.e. conversion to the C AST structures). As for being able to pass constructor arguments: I'd expect them to be positional arguments, not keyword arguments - anybody creating AST nodes would normally have Python.asdl open, no? |
|||
| msg64715 - (view) | Author: Georg Brandl (georg.brandl) * ![]() |
Date: 2008-03-29 18:31 | |
Okay, I'm dropping the attribute restriction part. Attaching new patch that allows creating nodes with fields (not attributes) as positional arguments, and setting all keyword arguments as attributes on self. |
|||
| msg64722 - (view) | Author: Martin v. Löwis (loewis) * ![]() |
Date: 2008-03-29 20:03 | |
Looks fine to me. It might be reasonable to further restrict the constructor to either 0 or len(_fields) arguments. |
|||
| msg64744 - (view) | Author: Georg Brandl (georg.brandl) * ![]() |
Date: 2008-03-30 07:01 | |
Committed in r62049. |
|||
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2022-04-11 14:56:32 | admin | set | github: 46757 |
| 2008-03-30 07:01:54 | georg.brandl | set | status: open -> closed messages: + msg64744 |
| 2008-03-29 20:03:12 | loewis | set | assignee: loewis -> georg.brandl resolution: accepted messages: + msg64722 |
| 2008-03-29 18:31:45 | georg.brandl | set | files:
+ ast-constructor-v2.diff messages: + msg64715 title: Restrict attributes of _ast nodes -> Easier creation of _ast nodes |
| 2008-03-29 14:49:17 | loewis | set | messages: + msg64700 |
| 2008-03-29 13:40:35 | georg.brandl | set | messages: + msg64693 |
| 2008-03-29 13:38:09 | georg.brandl | create | |
