Conversation
Sorry, something went wrong.
if count is RegexFlag, raise an error.
|
Another method is implementing re.subn?() functions in C, and check type(count) != RegexFlag there. In this way, Pattern.subn?() have no overhead at all. def sub(pattern, repl, string, count=0, flags=0):
return _compile(pattern, flags).sub(repl, string, count)
def subn(pattern, repl, string, count=0, flags=0):
return _compile(pattern, flags).subn(repl, string, count) |
Sorry, something went wrong.
| PyErr_SetString(PyExc_ValueError, | ||
| "count arguemnt wrong type."); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just keep the existing error. ValueError is wrong exception for wrong type, and the raised exception can be for example OverflowError.
Sorry, something went wrong.
| "count argument should not be RegexFlag."); | ||
| return NULL; | ||
| } else { | ||
| count_value = PyLong_AsSsize_t(count); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Look at the code for the n format unit in getargs.c. You should reproduce it.
Sorry, something went wrong.
| repl: object | ||
| string: object | ||
| count: Py_ssize_t = 0 | ||
| count: object(c_default="NULL") = 0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It could be easier to implement a custom converter (see docs for PyArg_Parse, format unit O&).
count: object(converter="my_converter_for_ssize_t_except_RegexFlag") = 0
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
I have just fallen into this trap. It's very easy to get cocky and forget to pay attention to the count argument. Any chance of at least adding type hints to the re library or would this break too many things? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
@serhiy-storchaka
In re.subn?() functions, some users wrongly use RegexFlag as the count parameter.
Many invalid bug reports can be found (#89621, #86639, #85930, #85830, #79724, #75110, #73091, #72038, #70542, #66949, #61863, #59972, #56287, #56166, #56156, #55471). Maybe there are some code still generating incorrect data silently.
This PR is just a draft, not completive. I didn't expect this PR to be merged.
See if you agree with this method. Compared to changing count to a keyword only parameter, it keeps compatibility, and the overhead is very small.
If you want to make a better PR, please make it.
IMO making such PR is faster & easier than reviewing.
Or let me know if you want me to perfect this PR.