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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Get rid of MDEF and LDEF [WIP] #2555

Closed
wants to merge 7 commits into from
Closed

Get rid of MDEF and LDEF [WIP] #2555

wants to merge 7 commits into from

Conversation

gvanrossum
Copy link
Member

@JukkaL what do you think? Note that the 'kind' of a node can have a number of values, it's just that all plain variables are now GDEF. This came up in #2553 (comment).

@elazarg what do you think? GDEF isn't the greatest name, but I couldn't really come up with a better one, and DEF feels too short/ambiguous.

elazarg
elazarg reviewed Dec 12, 2016
View reviewed changes
mypy/semanal.py
@@ -1037,7 +1037,7 @@ def process_import_over_existing_name(self,
imported_id: str, existing_symbol: SymbolTableNode,
module_symbol: SymbolTableNode,
import_node: ImportBase) -> bool:
if (existing_symbol.kind in (LDEF, GDEF, MDEF) and
if (existing_symbol.kind in (GDEF, GDEF, GDEF) and
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

== GDEF

mypy/semanal.py
if self.is_func_scope():
kind = LDEF
kind = GDEF
self.add_symbol(defn.name, SymbolTableNode(kind, defn.info), defn)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Inline kind

@elazarg
Copy link
Contributor

elazarg commented Dec 12, 2016

I think GDEF should not exist at all, and the type of node kind should be an Optional. This resolves the naming problem and the fact that it appears almost everywhere, adding little information to the code.

@gvanrossum
Copy link
Member Author

Possibly, but that might be a separate refactoring. I like to have stepping stones along the way. Also this PR is disruptive enough as it is (causing everyone else merge conflicts).

@JukkaL
Copy link
Collaborator

JukkaL commented Dec 12, 2016

Let's wait a bit before merging this -- I'm trying to remember if there are additional use cases for which the distinction may be still useful.

@gvanrossum gvanrossum changed the title Get rid of MDEF and LDEF Get rid of MDEF and LDEF [WIP] Dec 12, 2016
@gvanrossum
Copy link
Member Author

Let's not do this, it'll just cause merge conflicts and @JukkaL thinks the information might be useful for some additional ideas he has.

@gvanrossum
Copy link
Member Author

Here's some new code that's testing for MDEF:
https://github.com/python/mypy/pull/2510/files#diff-4b20f240e711dea5a3aa8a93897909aeR629

@gvanrossum gvanrossum closed this Dec 12, 2016
@gvanrossum gvanrossum deleted the simplify-gdef-mdef-ldef branch January 10, 2017 02:21
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@elazarg elazarg elazarg left review comments

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@gvanrossum @elazarg @JukkaL