Message146953
| Author |
smarnach |
| Recipients |
benjamin.peterson, petri.lehtinen, pitrou, smarnach |
| Date |
2011年11月03日.17:34:47 |
| SpamBayes Score |
1.1899481e-11 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1320341688.19.0.908675994058.issue13332@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
Getting the general case right seems a bit too difficult. Examples like
[execfile(n) for n in names if condition(n)]
execfile(execfile(n1) or n2)
try: 1 / 0
except execfile(n) or ZeroDivisionError: pass
would require rather complex transformations to get exactly matching behaviour, and obviously we don't want to explode the fixer code to support such nonsense.
I think it is enough to cover the case of an execfile() call that forms a statement of its own. Browsing through the first ten pages of a Google code search for "execfile" didn't reveal any other uses, except for a few that aren't covered by the current version of the fixer either. [1]
I'd suggest to simply throw a "could not convert" warning for any other uses of execfile(). Opinions?
[1]: http://www.google.com/codesearch#yqvQ9RM69FY/mercurial/lsprof.py&q=execfile&sq=&l=111&ct=rc&cd=49 |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2011年11月03日 17:34:48 | smarnach | set | recipients:
+ smarnach, pitrou, benjamin.peterson, petri.lehtinen |
| 2011年11月03日 17:34:48 | smarnach | set | messageid: <1320341688.19.0.908675994058.issue13332@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2011年11月03日 17:34:47 | smarnach | link | issue13332 messages |
| 2011年11月03日 17:34:47 | smarnach | create |
|