Source Command #485

RohanJnr · 2019-10-02T07:14:08Z

closes #331

Source command implemented as said in the issue.
The following is a screenshot of it being implemented:

… the cog in __main__.py

SebastiaanZ

Like mentioned in the issue, the standard approach does not work consistently for our bot, as it does not always return the right starting line and/or code length. I have not looked into why it's happening, although it may be because of decorators passing the function around.

As an example, issuing !source help sends me to https://github.com/python-discord/bot/blob/master/bot/cogs/help.py#L108-L140, which is obviously not where we want to end up. Help may be the only one for which this happens, but I haven't extensively tested all commands yet.

One additional problem is way you reconstruct the path to the .py file: We've recently started using a subpackage approach (directory with __init__.py) to group related functionality together. The command currently does not take that into account and expects all of the extension files to live directly in bot/cogs/.

As an example, issuing !source superstarify yields the link https://github.com/python-discord/bot/tree/master/bot/cogs/superstarify.py#L148-L219. This file does not exist and the function is actually located here: https://github.com/python-discord/bot/blob/master/bot/cogs/superstarify/__init__.py#L148-L219. (Notice that the line numbers are correct in this case.)

I think that if we do add this to the bot, the approach should be robust and not suffer from these edge cases. Additionally, I think that you should consider adding support for subcommands (!source docs get now sends you to the source code for docs, not the get subcommand) and restricting the command to channels like #bot-commands.

I do think the code you wrote is clean and easy to read and I think the functionality would be cool to have.

RohanJnr · 2019-10-02T16:10:17Z

Hey @RohanJnr,

Like mentioned in the issue, the standard approach does not work consistently for our bot, as it does not always return the right starting line and/or code length. I have not looked into why it's happening, although it may be because of decorators passing the function around.

As an example, issuing !source help sends me to https://github.com/python-discord/bot/blob/master/bot/cogs/help.py#L108-L140, which is obviously not where we want to end up. Help may be the only one for which this happens, but I haven't extensively tested all commands yet.

One additional problem is way you reconstruct the path to the .py file: We've recently started using a subpackage approach (directory with __init__.py) to group related functionality together. The command currently does not take that into account and expects all of the extension files to live directly in bot/cogs/.

As an example, issuing !source superstarify yields the link https://github.com/python-discord/bot/tree/master/bot/cogs/superstarify.py#L148-L219. This file does not exist and the function is actually located here: https://github.com/python-discord/bot/blob/master/bot/cogs/superstarify/__init__.py#L148-L219. (Notice that the line numbers are correct in this case.)

I think that if we do add this to the bot, the approach should be robust and not suffer from these edge cases. Additionally, I think that you should consider adding support for subcommands (!source docs get now sends you to the source code for docs, not the get subcommand) and restricting the command to channels like #bot-commands.

I do think the code you wrote is clean and easy to read and I think the functionality would be cool to have.

Thanks for the suggestion! will work on improving it.

RohanJnr · 2019-10-03T05:05:19Z

btw by subcommands, do u mean commands within a group?

RohanJnr · 2019-10-03T08:01:31Z

the only pending work is the pathfinding for the help command. I am not sure how to go about it. The subcommands URL generation works fine except for the tags group, some weared stuff happening. Maybe you can look through my code and find some fixes?

nekitdev · 2019-10-04T13:40:11Z

bot/cogs/source.py

    @commands.command(name="source")
-    async def command_source(self, ctx: commands.Context, command_name: str = None) -> None:
+    async def command_source(self, ctx: commands.Context, command_name: str = None, sub_command: str = None) -> None:


At the current state, only one command and one subcommand are supported. Why couldn't we do this? : async def command_source(self, ctx: commands.Context, *, command_name: str = None) -> None: This way, end-users can enter anything they wish.

nekitdev · 2019-10-04T13:43:22Z

bot/cogs/source.py

        """View the source of a command."""
        if command_name is None:
-            return await ctx.send("> https://github.com/python-discord/bot")
+            await ctx.send("> https://github.com/python-discord/bot")


Not sure why wouldn't we do return await ctx.send(...) in one line honestly, but ok if there is a reason.

If we're annotating that our function returns None then it should return None, not maybe None

Okay, I have just checked in discord.py. send returns a discord.Message instance, well then, we should return None.

nekitdev · 2019-10-04T13:45:32Z

bot/cogs/source.py


-        command = self.bot.get_command(command_name)


Instead of that sub_command usage, we could do self.bot.get_command(command_name) (almost like before it was deleted, but with new function arguments).

nekitdev

I have added some suggestions. Planning to do several tests now.

nekitdev · 2019-10-04T14:02:54Z

bot/cogs/source.py

+        """Make up the url for the source of the command."""
+        # Get the source code
+        src_code_object = command.callback.__code__
+        file_path = src_code_object.co_filename[5:]


Rapptz's implementation of getting the location was like this: file_name = src_code_object.co_filename and file_path = os.path.relpath(file_name).replace('\\', '/'). I think, should work; will do some tests in a bit.

nekitdev · 2019-10-04T14:05:52Z

bot/cogs/source.py

+        embed = discord.Embed(colour=discord.Colour.red())
+        embed.title = "Command Source"
+        embed.description = f"**{command.name.capitalize()}**\n"
+        embed.description += f"`{prefix}{command.name}`\n\n {url}"


Shouldn't we send command.qualified_name in the embed?

RohanJnr · 2019-10-04T15:58:18Z

Updated

nekitdev · 2019-10-04T16:06:30Z

bot/cogs/source.py

        if command is None:
            await ctx.send("No such command found.")
            return

-        url = self.get_command_url(command)
+        if command.name == "help":
+            url = "https://github.com/python-discord/bot/blob/master/bot/cogs/help.py#L475-L490"


In my opinion, we would better send a link without the lines here.

Which lines

The #L475-L490 should not be hard-coded in my opinion. I think we should just return the link to the help.py file.

I think we should just return the correct lines, but without hardcoding them.

@RohanJnr we can't have any hardcoded edge cases in this solution. Please try to find a solution that solves this without hardcoding.

nekitdev · 2019-10-04T16:08:15Z

All in all, @SebastiaanZ I think we are ready to merge (though, not sure if we should send the lines in explicit !source help implementation.

Related to #458 This commit adds a converter that automatically parses ISO-formatted datetime strings and returns a `datetime.datetime` object. It uses `dateutil.parser.isoparse` to do the heavy lifting, so it supports the same formats as this method. In addition, I have added tests that ensure that it accepts certain formats and added a description of these 'guaranteed' formats to the `ISODate.convert` docstring. This commit should make it easy to implement #485

SebastiaanZ

This PR is out of date with master and has some conflicts that need to be resolved. @lemonsaurus also rightly noted that we should rather have a solution that's robust instead of one that uses hard coded links for edge cases. Hard coded links will need to be maintained by hand and makes me wonder if more edge cases are going to come up in the future.

RohanJnr · 2019-10-17T02:06:50Z

what if I just return the file name for the help command? I will not hard code the file link tho, I can get it by the code.

lemonsaurus · 2019-10-20T09:18:09Z

Returning only the file name for the help command seems like a cheap solution. I think that this is solvable without hardcoding any of the replies. Given how stale this pull request is and how many unaddressed reviews are in it, I'm tempted to just give this task to someone else if you can't come up with an agnostic solution.

RohanJnr · 2019-10-21T09:19:19Z

okay, Thanks for the chance, I am not able to get the correct line numbers from help file :( . Marking this invalid.

done working on source command.Did it as said in the issue.Also added…

fb673aa

… the cog in __main__.py

SebastiaanZ mentioned this pull request Oct 2, 2019

Add converter for ISO-formatted datetime strings #473

Merged

SebastiaanZ requested changes Oct 2, 2019

View reviewed changes

sco1 added area: cogs t: feature New feature or request labels Oct 2, 2019

better url generation and also supports subcommands now.

e30400f

RohanJnr requested a review from SebastiaanZ October 3, 2019 08:01

nekitdev reviewed Oct 4, 2019

View reviewed changes

nekitdev suggested changes Oct 4, 2019

View reviewed changes

nekitdev reviewed Oct 4, 2019

View reviewed changes

RohanJnr added 2 commits October 4, 2019 20:49

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into source_cmd

1984f5d

made suggestions as per suggestions and hard coded url for help command.

0004dcc

nekitdev reviewed Oct 4, 2019

View reviewed changes

SebastiaanZ requested changes Oct 11, 2019

View reviewed changes

jchristgit assigned jchristgit and unassigned jchristgit Oct 11, 2019

lemonsaurus added the status: awaiting response label Oct 20, 2019

RohanJnr added the invalid This doesn't seem right label Oct 21, 2019

sco1 closed this Oct 25, 2019

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Source Command #485

Source Command #485

RohanJnr commented Oct 2, 2019

SebastiaanZ left a comment •

edited

RohanJnr commented Oct 2, 2019

RohanJnr commented Oct 3, 2019

RohanJnr commented Oct 3, 2019

nekitdev Oct 4, 2019 •

edited

nekitdev Oct 4, 2019 •

edited

sco1 Oct 4, 2019

nekitdev Oct 4, 2019

nekitdev Oct 4, 2019 •

edited

nekitdev left a comment •

edited

nekitdev Oct 4, 2019

nekitdev Oct 4, 2019

RohanJnr commented Oct 4, 2019

nekitdev Oct 4, 2019

RohanJnr Oct 4, 2019

nekitdev Oct 4, 2019

lemonsaurus Oct 4, 2019

nekitdev commented Oct 4, 2019

SebastiaanZ left a comment

RohanJnr commented Oct 17, 2019

lemonsaurus commented Oct 20, 2019

RohanJnr commented Oct 21, 2019

Source Command #485

Source Command #485

Conversation

RohanJnr commented Oct 2, 2019

SebastiaanZ left a comment • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

RohanJnr commented Oct 2, 2019

RohanJnr commented Oct 3, 2019

RohanJnr commented Oct 3, 2019

nekitdev Oct 4, 2019 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nekitdev Oct 4, 2019 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nekitdev Oct 4, 2019 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nekitdev left a comment • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

RohanJnr commented Oct 4, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nekitdev commented Oct 4, 2019

SebastiaanZ left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

RohanJnr commented Oct 17, 2019

lemonsaurus commented Oct 20, 2019

RohanJnr commented Oct 21, 2019

SebastiaanZ left a comment •

edited

nekitdev Oct 4, 2019 •

edited

nekitdev Oct 4, 2019 •

edited

nekitdev Oct 4, 2019 •

edited

nekitdev left a comment •

edited