friendly-traceback / friendly

Friendly-traceback's version used in most situations
https://friendly-traceback.github.io/docs/index.html
MIT License
41 stars 5 forks source link

No warning after redefining Python built-in since friendly 0.7.9 #43

Open mardukbp opened 1 year ago

mardukbp commented 1 year ago

Before version 0.7.9 when a Python built-in was redefined friendly issued a warning. This is specially useful for beginners, who actually do things like

print = 3

In case the warning now has to be manually activated, I believe that it would be a good idea to revert to making it default behavior. Because disabling safety measures should be a conscious decision.

aroberge commented 1 year ago

I've removed these warnings from the console for the following reason:

friendly-traceback: 0.7.35
friendly: 0.7.15
Python: 3.10.6
Type 'Friendly' for help on special functions/methods.

[1]: len = 1

[2]: a = len + b

Traceback (most recent call last):
  Code block [2], line 1
    a = len + b
NameError: name 'b' is not defined

[3]: where()

Exception raised on line 1 of code block [2].

     > 1| a = len + b

Friendly warning: you have redefined the python builtin len.
aroberge commented 1 year ago

It might be useful to re-introduce these warnings, but make them available in other environments on demand via an explicit call; perhaps something like check_unsafe(). By default, check_unsafe() would then be called each time some code is executed in the console. check_unsafe() could take an optional argument, check_unsafe(name) which would see if name is a module that has been imported, and examine whether or not some "unsafe" reassignment took place.

mardukbp commented 1 year ago

I see. Thank you for the thorough explanation. I noticed that the warning is not part of the output of explain(). I thought that explain() prints the concatenation of friendly_tb(), what(), why() and where().

Checking for shadowed variables from the modules imported by default and also from modules imported by the user would be nice. Instead of calling the function check_unsafe I propose calling it check_shadowed_names. I think that unsafe is usually used in the context of FFI, which involves passing pointers and manual memory management.

aroberge commented 1 year ago

Friendly warnings are shown when using explain(). image

I'm thinking of adding more checks than simply shadowing names. I might use the name check or check_code.

mardukbp commented 1 year ago

Now I see the warning. I was probably using an older version of friendly-traceback.