[AST] Procedure for AST Branch patches
What's the current situation with providing fixes for AST branch problems? There's a simple one in parsenumber in Python/ast.c relating to int/long unification and octal literals. The fix is just a direct copy of the relevant code from parsenumber in the old compile.c. Fixing it means the only failures left in test_grammar are those relating to generator expressions. I've put a patch on SF (1166879) and assigned it to Jeremy with group AST. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@email.com | Brisbane, Australia --------------------------------------------------------------- http://boredomandlaziness.skystorm.net
Nick Coghlan wrote:
What's the current situation with providing fixes for AST branch problems?
Make sure "AST" is used in the subject line; e.g., "[AST]" at the beginning. Unfortunately the AST group is only available for patches; not listed for bug reports (don't know why; can this be fixed?). Other than that, just assign it to me since I will most likely be doing AST work in the near future. -Brett
[Brett C.]
Make sure "AST" is used in the subject line; e.g., "[AST]" at the beginning. Unfortunately the AST group is only available for patches; not listed for bug reports (don't know why; can this be fixed?).
Your wish is my command: there's an AST group in Python's bug tracker now. FYI, each tracker has a distinct set of metadata choices, and nothing shows up in any of 'em by magic.
Other than that, just assign it to me since I will most likely be doing AST work in the near future.
Unfortunately, auto-assign keys off Category instead of Group metadata.
Make sure "AST" is used in the subject line; e.g., "[AST]" at the beginning. Unfortunately the AST group is only available for patches; not listed for bug reports (don't know why; can this be fixed?).
Other than that, just assign it to me since I will most likely be doing AST work in the near future.
Brett, I sent a few outstanding ones your way. I hate to complain again, I know everyone involved are volunteers, etc, etc; but it'd be really nice if someone could take a look at '[ 742621 ] ast-branch: msvc project sync'. The patch is almost two years old now, has been updated for VC7.1 and still hasn't been checked in. Without this, any Windows developers who check out the ast-branch will experience a broken build. -Grant
Grant Olson wrote:
Make sure "AST" is used in the subject line; e.g., "[AST]" at the beginning. Unfortunately the AST group is only available for patches; not listed for bug reports (don't know why; can this be fixed?).
Other than that, just assign it to me since I will most likely be doing AST work in the near future.
Brett,
I sent a few outstanding ones your way. I hate to complain again, I know everyone involved are volunteers, etc, etc; but it'd be really nice if someone could take a look at '[ 742621 ] ast-branch: msvc project sync'. The patch is almost two years old now, has been updated for VC7.1 and still hasn't been checked in. Without this, any Windows developers who check out the ast-branch will experience a broken build.
The problem is that I don't have access to a Windows machine so there is no way to verify the patch myself. I will try to get someone here to verify the patch, but I am not comfortable doing a blind commit. If one other person could verify that the patch is good I will apply it. -Brett
Grant Olson wrote:
Make sure "AST" is used in the subject line; e.g., "[AST]" at the beginning. Unfortunately the AST group is only available for patches; not listed for bug reports (don't know why; can this be fixed?).
Other than that, just assign it to me since I will most likely be doing AST work in the near future.
Brett,
I sent a few outstanding ones your way. I hate to complain again, I know everyone involved are volunteers, etc, etc; but it'd be really nice if someone could take a look at '[ 742621 ] ast-branch: msvc project sync'. The patch is almost two years old now, has been updated for VC7.1 and still hasn't been checked in. Without this, any Windows developers who check out the ast-branch will experience a broken build.
OK, thanks to John Ehresman here at PyCon sprint I got logistix's patch applied. Beyond a warning that a warning that decode_unicode() is never called and the parser module failing to compile under Windows everything should be fine for compiling the AST branch. Passing the test suite, though, is another question. =) -Brett
Brett C. wrote:
OK, thanks to John Ehresman here at PyCon sprint I got logistix's patch applied. Beyond a warning that a warning that decode_unicode() is never called and the parser module failing to compile under Windows everything should be fine for compiling the AST branch.
Under Linux (Suse 9.1), the parser module compiles with a couple of warnings about implicit declaration of PyParser_SimpleParseString, but the .so fails to load due to a missing symbol PyNode_Compile.
Passing the test suite, though, is another question. =)
Heh. I managed to get test_grammar to pass 100% last night, which is at least a start! And I must say that the new system is rather nice to work with - it took me a while to work out what was going on, but the multi-pass 'build AST', 'build symbol table', 'compile AST' is much cleaner than it is with the lists-of-lists arrangement on the trunk (which is the entire point of the AST-branch, I guess. . .) Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan@email.com | Brisbane, Australia --------------------------------------------------------------- http://boredomandlaziness.skystorm.net
Nick Coghlan wrote:
Brett C. wrote:
OK, thanks to John Ehresman here at PyCon sprint I got logistix's patch applied. Beyond a warning that a warning that decode_unicode() is never called and the parser module failing to compile under Windows everything should be fine for compiling the AST branch.
Under Linux (Suse 9.1), the parser module compiles with a couple of warnings about implicit declaration of PyParser_SimpleParseString, but the .so fails to load due to a missing symbol PyNode_Compile.
It's a known issue. I am just ignoring the failed compile.
Passing the test suite, though, is another question. =)
Heh. I managed to get test_grammar to pass 100% last night, which is at least a start!
Yeah, I am hoping to look at your generators patch before you get back in the country.
And I must say that the new system is rather nice to work with - it took me a while to work out what was going on, but the multi-pass 'build AST', 'build symbol table', 'compile AST' is much cleaner than it is with the lists-of-lists arrangement on the trunk (which is the entire point of the AST-branch, I guess. . .)
How the system works will be *much* clearer with the new version of Python/compile.txt, assuming everyone has not been lying to me about the clarity. -Brett
participants (4)
-
Brett C. -
Grant Olson -
Nick Coghlan -
Tim Peters