bpo-32888: enhance ast.literal_eval error messagess with context information#17662
bpo-32888: enhance ast.literal_eval error messagess with context information#17662isidentical wants to merge 1 commit intopython:mainfrom
Conversation
| def _convert_num(node): | ||
| def _raise_malformed_node(node, context = None): | ||
| message = "malformed node or string" | ||
| if context is not None and isinstance(node, AST): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why is it necessary to check here that node is an AST and not just that context is not None?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wonder if 'context' is overloaded. Maybe it's better not to add it here to the string passed in, and let the context arg be complete, like "literal expression" or "unary expression arg".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why is it necessary to check here that node is an AST and not just that context is not None?
For malformed nodes (manually constructed), it might not be an AST type, example (already presented in tests);
ast.BinOp(
ast.Constant(1), ast.Add(), "oops"
): "malformed node or string: 'oops'",I wonder if 'context' is overloaded. Maybe it's better not to add it here to the string passed in, and let the context arg be complete, like "literal expression" or "unary expression arg".
I am not a native speaker, but from the point of messages, it satisfies the expectations and gives the precise location. (+a => ValueError: malformed node or string in binary operation context: <ast.Name object at 0x7f02f058d5f0>). What would you prefer instead of the message above? By the way thanks for your bump on this old PR! I completely forgot it existed since there was no activity :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- I see about the first point.
- On the wording - would it work to simply have "malformed binary operation" in this case?
- My pleasure 👍
Based on changes from #340.
https://bugs.python.org/issue32888