inspect.getsource show @decorators

[simonpercivall]

BPO	1006219
Nosy	@simonpercivall
Files	inspect.py.diff inspect.py.3.diff: version 3 test_inspect_decorators.py

^{Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.}

Show more details

GitHub fields:

assignee = None
closed_at = <Date 2004-08-18.12:58:57.000>
created_at = <Date 2004-08-09.21:32:27.000>
labels = ['library']
title = 'inspect.getsource show @decorators'
updated_at = <Date 2004-08-18.12:58:57.000>
user = 'https://github.com/simonpercivall'

bugs.python.org fields:

activity = <Date 2004-08-18.12:58:57.000>
actor = 'jlgijsbers'
assignee = 'jlgijsbers'
closed = True
closed_date = None
closer = None
components = ['Library (Lib)']
creation = <Date 2004-08-09.21:32:27.000>
creator = 'simon.percivall'
dependencies = []
files = ['6168', '6169', '6170']
hgrepos = []
issue_num = 1006219
keywords = ['patch']
message_count = 9.0
messages = ['46614', '46615', '46616', '46617', '46618', '46619', '46620', '46621', '46622']
nosy_count = 2.0
nosy_names = ['jlgijsbers', 'simon.percivall']
pr_nums = []
priority = 'normal'
resolution = 'accepted'
stage = None
status = 'closed'
superseder = None
type = None
url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue1006219'
versions = ['Python 2.4']

[simonpercivall]

The getsource function in inspect.py breaks badly with
the @decorators.

The inspect mechanism scans backwards from the topmost
decorator until it finds some acceptable statement (it
can be anything: another function, an import line, etc.).

The patch takes care of that. It'll print all
decorators for a function as well as the function itself.

[simonpercivall]

Logged In: YES
user_id=329382

Yeah ... It doesn't really fix anything.

[simonpercivall]

Logged In: YES
user_id=329382

Yes, it does.

[simonpercivall]

Logged In: YES
user_id=329382

Also fix that getsource really doesn't handle one-line
functions, with new patch.

[jlgijsbers]

Logged In: YES
user_id=469548

The patch seems okay on casual inspection, but it still
needs to have tests. Feel free to assign it to me after
adding those.

[jlgijsbers]

Logged In: YES
user_id=469548

Handling one-line functions fixes problem 1 reported in
http://python.org/sf/769569.

[simonpercivall]

Logged In: YES
user_id=329382

Added tests for the patch.

Note that the patch for showing one-liners breaks two-line
lambdas.

[simonpercivall]

Logged In: YES
user_id=329382

Eh, that should be:

Note that the patch for showing one-liners breaks showing
the source of two-line lambdas. Only the first line shows.

[jlgijsbers]

Logged In: YES
user_id=469548

Okay, I've checked in the patch that handles decorators as
rev 1.54 of inspect.py and rev 1.16 of test_inspect.py (note
that I integrated your tests into this file).

The oneline and twoline cases in test_inspect_decorators.py
don't fail for me, even without the patch, so I'm not
applying a patch that breaks a previously working case <wink>.

If you're still interested in fixing this, I suggest you
write down all the test cases that should work (including
http://python.org/sf/769569 and having a twoline lambda at
the end of a file), see whether they fail now and open a new
tracker item with a patch that fixes those that don't.