-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 63
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
Raise exception when open with write mode in call stack #140
Open
jayqi
wants to merge
7
commits into
master
Choose a base branch
from
open-raise-exception
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
7 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
a7ac50f
Raise exception when open with write mode in call stack
jayqi 81e92d3
Implement AST-based writeable open detection
pjbull 5b135a9
docs update
pjbull ee69c9b
Remove extra code and exception update message
pjbull 35edbb0
Update to track and use line numbers for proper error
pjbull 6395eb5
Use writable assert for proper error message
pjbull e6c2bae
Fix line mix-up in python<=3.7
pjbull File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
So this is interesting. I thought it was a feature of my previous version of the test that the function would have both safe and unsafe
open
s, and only fail for the unsafe one. Is it the case that if we had a safeopen
first and unsafeopen
second in the same function, it would fail on the first one because the checking code would see the secondopen
?Anyways, I think some additional things we want to test:
open(pathlib_path, "w")
andopen(cloud_path
, "w")` in the same functionFalse
disables the check