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

bpo-46652: Use code.co_qualname to provide richer information #31150

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

bpo-46652: Use code.co_qualname to provide richer information #31150

wants to merge 1 commit into from
+121 −117

Conversation

@P403n1x87
Copy link
Contributor

@P403n1x87 P403n1x87 commented Feb 5, 2022 •
edited by bedevere-bot

Use the code.co_qualname field to provide richer information in output generation, such as tracebacks, profiles, debugging etc...

https://bugs.python.org/issue46652
@sweeneyde
Copy link
Member

@sweeneyde sweeneyde commented Feb 5, 2022

It might be easier to review and get this merged if it was a couple of smaller PRs that touch fewer files each. Maybe just change tb_printinternal in traceback.c (probably already making most of the desired impact for users) and the associated tests in this PR, then open other PRs as necessary? E.g. one for asyncio-related things, one for tracing/profilers, etc.

In particular, asyncore is deprecated and so it probably shouldn't change, and IIRC we usually like to separate IDLE changes on their own.

@P403n1x87
Copy link
Contributor Author

@P403n1x87 P403n1x87 commented Feb 6, 2022

It might be easier to review and get this merged if it was a couple of smaller PRs that touch fewer files each.

👍 Makes sense and I was already thinking about this. I just wanted to explore how far this could have gone. I'll reduce this PR to just the changes in traceback.c and leave the rest to subsequent PRs.

terryjreedy
terryjreedy requested changes Feb 6, 2022
View changes
Copy link
Member

@terryjreedy terryjreedy left a comment

See issue for general comments.

One way to split the PR would be separate PRs for changes related to tracebacks, profiles, and 'other'.

Lib/test/test_logging.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Lib/idlelib/stackviewer.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@bedevere-bot
Copy link

@bedevere-bot bedevere-bot commented Feb 6, 2022

A Python core developer has requested some changes be made to your pull request before we can consider merging it. If you could please address their requests along with any other requests in other reviews from core developers that would be appreciated.

Once you have made the requested changes, please leave a comment on this pull request containing the phrase I have made the requested changes; please review again. I will then notify any core developers who have left a review that you're ready for them to take another look at this pull request.

@P403n1x87 P403n1x87 force-pushed the bpo-46652/use-qualname branch from c59bd24 to d71fc8c Feb 6, 2022
@P403n1x87
bpo-46652: Use code.co_qualname to provide richer tracing
7ed2c65 
Use the code.co_qualname field to provide richer information in tracing
output generation.
@P403n1x87 P403n1x87 force-pushed the bpo-46652/use-qualname branch from d71fc8c to 7ed2c65 Feb 6, 2022
@P403n1x87
Copy link
Contributor Author

@P403n1x87 P403n1x87 commented Feb 6, 2022

I have made the requested changes; please review again

@bedevere-bot
Copy link

@bedevere-bot bedevere-bot commented Feb 6, 2022

Thanks for making the requested changes!

@terryjreedy: please review the changes made to this pull request.

@bedevere-bot bedevere-bot requested a review from terryjreedy Feb 6, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@1st1 1st1

@asvetlov asvetlov

@iritkatriel iritkatriel

@vsajip vsajip

@terryjreedy terryjreedy

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
awaiting change review CLA signed
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
5 participants
@P403n1x87 @sweeneyde @bedevere-bot @terryjreedy @the-knights-who-say-ni