GNU bug report logs - #75729
[PATCH] python-mode: add `exit` to the list of block-enders

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 75729 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 75729 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH] python-mode: add `exit` to the list of block-enders
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 18:41:54 +0300

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

`exit()` ends current codeflow, there can't be any code past it. So
account `exit` similarly to `return`, `continue`, etc.

[1.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #8 received at 75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>, kobarity <kobarity <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#75729: [PATCH] python-mode: add `exit` to the list of
 block-enders
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 17:48:41 +0200

> From: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>
> Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 18:41:54 +0300
> 
> 
> `exit()` ends current codeflow, there can't be any code past it. So
> account `exit` similarly to `return`, `continue`, etc.
> 
> From 7806987dd88b2507d97255c2e6ca989e791c798b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>
> Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 18:34:54 +0300
> Subject: [PATCH] python-mode: add `exit` to the list of block-enders
> 
> `exit()` ends current codeflow, there can't be any code past it. So
> account `exit` similarly to `return`, `continue`, etc.
> 
> * /lisp/progmodes/python.el (python-rx): add `exit` to the list of
> block-enders.

This should start with a capital letter (to be a complete sentence).

> ---
>  lisp/progmodes/python.el | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/lisp/progmodes/python.el b/lisp/progmodes/python.el
> index 16c296a8f86..2feb9f47e1a 100644
> --- a/lisp/progmodes/python.el
> +++ b/lisp/progmodes/python.el
> @@ -442,7 +442,8 @@ python-rx
>                                      symbol-end))
>              (block-ender       (seq symbol-start
>                                      (or
> -                                     "break" "continue" "pass" "raise" "return")
> +                                     "break" "continue" "pass" "raise" "return"
> +                                     "exit")
>                                      symbol-end))
>              (decorator         (seq line-start (* space) ?@ (any letter ?_)
>                                      (* (any word ?_))))
> -- 
> 2.48.1
> 

Thanks.  kobarity, any comments?

Message #11 received at 75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ship Mints <shipmints <at> gmail.com>
To: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>
Cc: 75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#75729: [PATCH] python-mode: add `exit` to the list of
 block-enders
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 10:47:51 -0500

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Do you want to consider more of the terminal calls? os.exit() os._exit()
sys.exit() quit() (though quit raises SystemExit which could be locally
caught; I think it's equivalent to raise SystemExit?).

On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 10:43 AM Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>
wrote:

> `exit()` ends current codeflow, there can't be any code past it. So
> account `exit` similarly to `return`, `continue`, etc.
>
>
>

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #14 received at 75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>
To: Ship Mints <shipmints <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#75729: [PATCH] python-mode: add `exit` to the list of
 block-enders
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 18:55:20 +0300

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Tue, 2025-01-21 at 10:47 -0500, Ship Mints wrote:
> Do you want to consider more of the terminal calls? os.exit()
> os._exit() sys.exit() quit() (though quit raises SystemExit which
> could be locally caught; I think it's equivalent to raise
> SystemExit?).
> 
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 10:43 AM Konstantin Kharlamov
> <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru> wrote:
> > `exit()` ends current codeflow, there can't be any code past it. So
> > account `exit` similarly to `return`, `continue`, etc.

Good point, thank you! I changed the patch to account for `quit` as
well.

If this is acceptable, I'd prefer to be light on the changes here and
only account for exit and quit for now because it's very simple to
support 😊

Also fixed the commit message per Eli's comment.

[1.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #17 received at 75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, kobarity <kobarity <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#75729: [PATCH] python-mode: add `exit` to the list of
 block-enders
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 18:56:22 +0300

On Tue, 2025-01-21 at 17:48 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>
> > Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 18:41:54 +0300
> > 
> > 
> > `exit()` ends current codeflow, there can't be any code past it. So
> > account `exit` similarly to `return`, `continue`, etc.
> > 
> > From 7806987dd88b2507d97255c2e6ca989e791c798b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
> > 2001
> > From: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>
> > Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 18:34:54 +0300
> > Subject: [PATCH] python-mode: add `exit` to the list of block-
> > enders
> > 
> > `exit()` ends current codeflow, there can't be any code past it. So
> > account `exit` similarly to `return`, `continue`, etc.
> > 
> > * /lisp/progmodes/python.el (python-rx): add `exit` to the list of
> > block-enders.
> 
> This should start with a capital letter (to be a complete sentence).

Thank you! Fixed in the v2 sent in reply to Ship's email 😊

Message #20 received at 75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>
To: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>, 75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#75729: [PATCH] python-mode: add `exit` to the list of
 block-enders
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 10:52:51 -0800

Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru> writes:

> diff --git a/lisp/progmodes/python.el b/lisp/progmodes/python.el
> index 16c296a8f86..2feb9f47e1a 100644
> --- a/lisp/progmodes/python.el
> +++ b/lisp/progmodes/python.el
> @@ -442,7 +442,8 @@ python-rx
>                                      symbol-end))
>              (block-ender       (seq symbol-start
>                                      (or
> -                                     "break" "continue" "pass" "raise" "return")
> +                                     "break" "continue" "pass" "raise" "return"
> +                                     "exit")
>                                      symbol-end))
>              (decorator         (seq line-start (* space) ?@ (any letter ?_)
>                                      (* (any word ?_))))
> --
> 2.48.1

Could you describe what behaviour changes this will result in?

I recommend something brief about that to the commit message too.

Message #23 received at 75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>
To: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>, 75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#75729: [PATCH v3] python-mode: add `exit` to the list of
 block-enders
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 22:00:16 +0300

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Tue, 2025-01-21 at 10:52 -0800, Stefan Kangas wrote:
> Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru> writes:
> 
> > diff --git a/lisp/progmodes/python.el b/lisp/progmodes/python.el
> > index 16c296a8f86..2feb9f47e1a 100644
> > --- a/lisp/progmodes/python.el
> > +++ b/lisp/progmodes/python.el
> > @@ -442,7 +442,8 @@ python-rx
> >                                      symbol-end))
> >              (block-ender       (seq symbol-start
> >                                      (or
> > -                                     "break" "continue" "pass"
> > "raise" "return")
> > +                                     "break" "continue" "pass"
> > "raise" "return"
> > +                                     "exit")
> >                                      symbol-end))
> >              (decorator         (seq line-start (* space) ?@ (any
> > letter ?_)
> >                                      (* (any word ?_))))
> > --
> > 2.48.1
> 
> Could you describe what behaviour changes this will result in?
> 
> I recommend something brief about that to the commit message too.

Thank you, done! I put the following text to the commit message, please
see if it describes the change well enough:

> `exit()` and `quit()` end the current codeflow, there can't be any
> code past it, similarly to `return`, `continue`, etc. So when
> calculating indentation for the line next to `exit()` and `quit()`,
> decrease the indentation level.

Patch is attached.

[1.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #26 received at 75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>
To: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>, 75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#75729: [PATCH v3] python-mode: add `exit` to the list of
 block-enders
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 13:42:34 -0600

Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru> writes:

> On Tue, 2025-01-21 at 10:52 -0800, Stefan Kangas wrote:
>
>> Could you describe what behaviour changes this will result in?
>>
>> I recommend something brief about that to the commit message too.
>
> Thank you, done! I put the following text to the commit message, please
> see if it describes the change well enough:

Thanks!

Message #29 received at 75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: kobarity <kobarity <at> gmail.com>
To: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, 75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#75729: [PATCH v3] python-mode: add `exit` to the list of
 block-enders
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 01:01:26 +0900

Ship Mints wrote:
> Do you want to consider more of the terminal calls? os.exit() os._exit()
> sys.exit() quit() (though quit raises SystemExit which could be locally
> caught; I think it's equivalent to raise SystemExit?).

I too would prefer to include these.  Because I think `sys.exit()` is
recommended over `exit().

https://pylint.readthedocs.io/en/latest/user_guide/messages/refactor/consider-using-sys-exit.html

Another point is that although `exit()` ends current codeflow, `exit`
does not end current codeflow.  This is where it differs from
`return`, etc.

This is a bit complicated, but how about the following code?

            (block-ender       (seq
                                symbol-start
                                (or
                                 (seq (or
                                       "break" "continue" "pass" "raise" "return")
                                  symbol-end)
                                 (seq
                                  (or
                                   (seq (? (or (seq "os." (? ?_)) "sys.")) "exit")
                                   "quit") (* space) "("))))

Message #32 received at 75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>
To: kobarity <kobarity <at> gmail.com>, Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, 75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#75729: [PATCH v3] python-mode: add `exit` to the list of
 block-enders
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2025 14:51:08 -0600

kobarity <kobarity <at> gmail.com> writes:

> This is a bit complicated, but how about the following code?
>
>             (block-ender       (seq
>                                 symbol-start
>                                 (or
>                                  (seq (or
>                                        "break" "continue" "pass" "raise" "return")
>                                   symbol-end)
>                                  (seq
>                                   (or
>                                    (seq (? (or (seq "os." (? ?_)) "sys.")) "exit")
>                                    "quit") (* space) "("))))

LGTM.

Message #35 received at 75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>
To: kobarity <kobarity <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, 75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#75729: [PATCH v4] python-mode: add `exit` to the list of
 block-enders
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 01:12:32 +0300

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Thu, 2025-01-23 at 01:01 +0900, kobarity wrote:
> 
> Ship Mints wrote:
> > Do you want to consider more of the terminal calls? os.exit()
> > os._exit()
> > sys.exit() quit() (though quit raises SystemExit which could be
> > locally
> > caught; I think it's equivalent to raise SystemExit?).
> 
> I too would prefer to include these.  Because I think `sys.exit()` is
> recommended over `exit().
> 
> https://pylint.readthedocs.io/en/latest/user_guide/messages/refactor/consider-using-sys-exit.html
> 
> Another point is that although `exit()` ends current codeflow, `exit`
> does not end current codeflow.  This is where it differs from
> `return`, etc.
> 
> This is a bit complicated, but how about the following code?
> 
>             (block-ender       (seq
>                                 symbol-start
>                                 (or
>                                  (seq (or
>                                        "break" "continue" "pass"
> "raise" "return")
>                                   symbol-end)
>                                  (seq
>                                   (or
>                                    (seq (? (or (seq "os." (? ?_))
> "sys.")) "exit")
>                                    "quit") (* space) "("))))

Thank you, I replaced the code and tested it, it works for me. I did a
small change though: I moved the `(* space…` part on the new line to
align it with `(or …)`. In the older code it looked like this text is
part of the `(or …)` expression. But please see if it's okay this way,
you definitely have more ELisp experience 😊

[1.patch (text/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #38 received at 75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: kobarity <kobarity <at> gmail.com>
To: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, 75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#75729: [PATCH v4] python-mode: add `exit` to the list of
 block-enders
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2025 00:10:33 +0900

Konstantin Kharlamov wrote:
> On Thu, 2025-01-23 at 01:01 +0900, kobarity wrote:
> > 
> > Ship Mints wrote:
> > > Do you want to consider more of the terminal calls? os.exit()
> > > os._exit()
> > > sys.exit() quit() (though quit raises SystemExit which could be
> > > locally
> > > caught; I think it's equivalent to raise SystemExit?).
> > 
> > I too would prefer to include these.  Because I think `sys.exit()` is
> > recommended over `exit().
> > 
> > https://pylint.readthedocs.io/en/latest/user_guide/messages/refactor/consider-using-sys-exit.html
> > 
> > Another point is that although `exit()` ends current codeflow, `exit`
> > does not end current codeflow.  This is where it differs from
> > `return`, etc.
> > 
> > This is a bit complicated, but how about the following code?
> > 
> >             (block-ender       (seq
> >                                 symbol-start
> >                                 (or
> >                                  (seq (or
> >                                        "break" "continue" "pass"
> > "raise" "return")
> >                                   symbol-end)
> >                                  (seq
> >                                   (or
> >                                    (seq (? (or (seq "os." (? ?_))
> > "sys.")) "exit")
> >                                    "quit") (* space) "("))))
> 
> Thank you, I replaced the code and tested it, it works for me. I did a
> small change though: I moved the `(* space…` part on the new line to
> align it with `(or …)`. In the older code it looked like this text is
> part of the `(or …)` expression. But please see if it's okay this way,
> you definitely have more ELisp experience 😊

Thanks, it looks good to me.

Message #45 received at 75729-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>
Cc: kobarity <at> gmail.com, stefankangas <at> gmail.com, 75729-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#75729: [PATCH v4] python-mode: add `exit` to the list of
 block-enders
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2025 12:54:04 +0200

> From: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>, 
> 	75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 01:12:32 +0300
> 
> On Thu, 2025-01-23 at 01:01 +0900, kobarity wrote:
> > 
> > Ship Mints wrote:
> > > Do you want to consider more of the terminal calls? os.exit()
> > > os._exit()
> > > sys.exit() quit() (though quit raises SystemExit which could be
> > > locally
> > > caught; I think it's equivalent to raise SystemExit?).
> > 
> > I too would prefer to include these.  Because I think `sys.exit()` is
> > recommended over `exit().
> > 
> > https://pylint.readthedocs.io/en/latest/user_guide/messages/refactor/consider-using-sys-exit.html
> > 
> > Another point is that although `exit()` ends current codeflow, `exit`
> > does not end current codeflow.  This is where it differs from
> > `return`, etc.
> > 
> > This is a bit complicated, but how about the following code?
> > 
> >             (block-ender       (seq
> >                                 symbol-start
> >                                 (or
> >                                  (seq (or
> >                                        "break" "continue" "pass"
> > "raise" "return")
> >                                   symbol-end)
> >                                  (seq
> >                                   (or
> >                                    (seq (? (or (seq "os." (? ?_))
> > "sys.")) "exit")
> >                                    "quit") (* space) "("))))
> 
> Thank you, I replaced the code and tested it, it works for me. I did a
> small change though: I moved the `(* space…` part on the new line to
> align it with `(or …)`. In the older code it looked like this text is
> part of the `(or …)` expression. But please see if it's okay this way,
> you definitely have more ELisp experience 😊

Thanks, installed on the master branch, and closing the bug.

Please in the future always mention the bug number (when known) in the
commit log message.

Message #48 received at 75729-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: kobarity <at> gmail.com, stefankangas <at> gmail.com, 75729-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#75729: [PATCH v4] python-mode: add `exit` to the list of
 block-enders
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2025 14:04:20 +0300

On Sat, 2025-01-25 at 12:54 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel <at> yandex.ru>
> > Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, Stefan Kangas
> > <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>, 
> > 	75729 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> > Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 01:12:32 +0300
> > 
> > On Thu, 2025-01-23 at 01:01 +0900, kobarity wrote:
> > > 
> > > Ship Mints wrote:
> > > > Do you want to consider more of the terminal calls? os.exit()
> > > > os._exit()
> > > > sys.exit() quit() (though quit raises SystemExit which could be
> > > > locally
> > > > caught; I think it's equivalent to raise SystemExit?).
> > > 
> > > I too would prefer to include these.  Because I think
> > > `sys.exit()` is
> > > recommended over `exit().
> > > 
> > > https://pylint.readthedocs.io/en/latest/user_guide/messages/refactor/consider-using-sys-exit.html
> > > 
> > > Another point is that although `exit()` ends current codeflow,
> > > `exit`
> > > does not end current codeflow.  This is where it differs from
> > > `return`, etc.
> > > 
> > > This is a bit complicated, but how about the following code?
> > > 
> > >             (block-ender       (seq
> > >                                 symbol-start
> > >                                 (or
> > >                                  (seq (or
> > >                                        "break" "continue" "pass"
> > > "raise" "return")
> > >                                   symbol-end)
> > >                                  (seq
> > >                                   (or
> > >                                    (seq (? (or (seq "os." (? ?_))
> > > "sys.")) "exit")
> > >                                    "quit") (* space) "("))))
> > 
> > Thank you, I replaced the code and tested it, it works for me. I
> > did a
> > small change though: I moved the `(* space…` part on the new line
> > to
> > align it with `(or …)`. In the older code it looked like this text
> > is
> > part of the `(or …)` expression. But please see if it's okay this
> > way,
> > you definitely have more ELisp experience 😊
> 
> Thanks, installed on the master branch, and closing the bug.
> 
> Please in the future always mention the bug number (when known) in
> the
> commit log message.

Thank you, I'll try to remember 😊 A lot of things to keep in mind
regarding commit messages in the project, I wish Savannah git would
provide a CI that would automatically check such things…

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.