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

Previous Next

Full log

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.

Previous Next

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