-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 750
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.
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
Docstring may also be prefixed with U and R. #878
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
46ffca9
to
e15665b
Compare
Also just |
@@ -133,7 +133,7 @@ def lru_cache(maxsize=128): # noqa as it's a fake implementation. | |||
RAISE_COMMA_REGEX = re.compile(r'raise\s+\w+\s*,') | |||
RERAISE_COMMA_REGEX = re.compile(r'raise\s+\w+\s*,.*,\s*\w+\s*$') | |||
ERRORCODE_REGEX = re.compile(r'\b[A-Z]\d{3}\b') | |||
DOCSTRING_REGEX = re.compile(r'u?r?["\']') |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
russian strings (ru'foo'
) are not valid -- could you also add a test case to demonstrate your change while you're at it -- thanks!
$ python2
Python 2.7.15+ (default, Nov 27 2018, 23:36:35)
[GCC 7.3.0] on linux2
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> ru'foo'
File "<stdin>", line 1
ru'foo'
^
SyntaxError: invalid syntax
>>>
$ python3
Python 3.6.8 (default, Jan 14 2019, 11:02:34)
[GCC 8.0.1 20180414 (experimental) [trunk revision 259383]] on linux
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> ru'foo'
File "<stdin>", line 1
ru'foo'
^
SyntaxError: invalid syntax
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I updated the PR. I'm not sure how to add relevant test though; pycodestyle does not appear to check specifically for string prefixes. |
I'm not sure what this PR fixes then -- did you have a particular case where this fixed something? I was able to debug what this is intended to protect against (I think?) --- a/pycodestyle.py
+++ b/pycodestyle.py
@@ -374,6 +374,9 @@ def blank_lines(logical_line, blank_lines, indent_level, line_number,
previous_indent_level < indent_level or
DOCSTRING_REGEX.match(previous_logical)
):
+
+ if not DOCSTRING_REGEX.match(previous_logical):
+ breakpoint()
ancestor_level = indent_level
nested = False
# Search backwards for a def ancestor or tree root this is hit for the following testcase from the testsuite: class X:
def a():
pass
def b():
pass Adjusting this slightly: class X:
def a():
"""docstring"""
def b():
pass that passes with no errors: $ python3.7 -m pycodestyle t.py
$ But, if we adjust it: class X:
def a():
U"""docstring"""
def b():
pass $ python3.7 -m pycodestyle t.py
t.py:5:5: E301 expected 1 blank line, found 0 You can probably use this difference to write a testcase I imagine? |
No description provided.