Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

Fix comments in REPL - fixes #78 #79

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
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 28, 2019
Merged

Fix comments in REPL - fixes #78 #79

merged 1 commit into from
Sep 28, 2019

Conversation

ncw
Copy link
Collaborator

@ncw ncw commented Sep 15, 2019

Before this change, entering a comment in the REPL caused the REPL to
read the comment indefinitely effectively breaking it.

After this change the behaviour should be exactly the same as python3/

@ncw
Copy link
Collaborator Author

ncw commented Sep 15, 2019

Can you review this for me @corona10 ?

@ncw ncw mentioned this pull request Sep 15, 2019
Closed
@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Sep 15, 2019 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

Merging #79 into master will increase coverage by <.01%.
The diff coverage is 100%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #79      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   68.65%   68.66%   +<.01%     
==========================================
  Files          59       59              
  Lines       10525    10528       +3     
==========================================
+ Hits         7226     7229       +3     
  Misses       2790     2790              
  Partials      509      509
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
repl/repl.go 100% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
symtable/symtable.go 94.23% <0%> (ø) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update eb115a9...9a4df56. Read the comment docs.

corona10
corona10 reviewed Sep 15, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@corona10 corona10 left a comment •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This patch will fix this issue #78 .
But the input of '#' should be handled as same as below code?
Should we update grammar file for this?

[Gpython dev]
- os/arch: darwin/amd64
- go version: go1.10
>>> def a(): pass
>>>

@corona10
Copy link
Collaborator

This is the example of pypy and rustpython.

Python 3.6.1 (dab365a465140aa79a5f3ba4db784c4af4d5c195, Feb 18 2019, 10:53:27)
[PyPy 7.0.0-alpha0 with GCC 4.2.1 Compatible Apple LLVM 10.0.0 (clang-1000.11.45.5)] on darwin
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
And now for something completely different: ``"it's likely temporary until
forever" arigo''
>>>> #
>>>> #
>>>>
Welcome to the magnificent Rust Python 0.1.0 interpreter 😱 🖖
>>>>> #
>>>>>

@corona10
Copy link
Collaborator

And it still doesn't work well on my local laptop with branch fix-78-repl bcb3785

Python 3.4.0 (none, unknown)
[Gpython dev]
- os/arch: darwin/amd64
- go version: go1.10
>>> #
... #
...

@ncw
Copy link
Collaborator Author

ncw commented Sep 15, 2019

And it still doesn't work well on my local laptop with branch fix-78-repl bcb3785

Python 3.4.0 (none, unknown)
[Gpython dev]
- os/arch: darwin/amd64
- go version: go1.10
>>> #
... #
...

Ah you are right this is broken :-(

The pypy and rustpython ways of doing it are

  • a whole lot more logical in my opinion
  • much easier that emulating python3 exactly

Shall I make it work like that?

@corona10
Copy link
Collaborator

@ncw
Yes, please.
IMHO, we don't have to follow everything of CPython :)

@ncw
Fix comments in REPL - fixes #78
9a4df56 
Before this change, entering a comment in the REPL caused the REPL to
read the comment indefinitely effectively breaking it.

After this change the behaviour is the same as pypy.  The cpython
behaviour is slightly different printing a '...' after a comment line.
This is rather illogical and difficult to emulate properly.
@ncw
Copy link
Collaborator Author

ncw commented Sep 15, 2019

OK I did that! PTAL

@corona10
Copy link
Collaborator

@ncw

gpython/parser/lexer.go

Line 375 in 2609237

func (x *yyLex) Lex(yylval *yySymType) (ret int) {

Can we fix this issue on lexer level approach?

@corona10
Copy link
Collaborator

@ncw
This PR is pending for 2 weeks.
Should we merge this PR for this time and later fix it?
Or do you have any ideas?
Thanks!

@ncw
Copy link
Collaborator Author

ncw commented Sep 28, 2019

I think this is good to go now.

I don't think fixing it in the lexer is the right place - this is specifically to do with how the REPL works and in particular how the single input grammar works which is a bit strange but it is how the Python grammar is defined.

I'll merge this now and if there are any problem with it I'm sure we can fix them up :-)

@ncw ncw merged commit 8c361a8 into master Sep 28, 2019
@corona10 corona10 deleted the fix-78-repl branch September 29, 2019 03:17
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@corona10 corona10 corona10 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
@ncw @codecov-io @corona10