Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1168 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 91.26% 91.29% +0.03%
==========================================
Files 261 262 +1
Lines 26877 26899 +22
==========================================
+ Hits 24529 24558 +29
+ Misses 2348 2341 -7 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
|
This seems like an improvement, thank you. It's really hard to catch a specific |
zsol
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for this! I've got a few minor comments but overall looks great!
… on exception messages)
|
Thanks for the support @kiri11 ! I hope everything is now ready (apart from that |
|
You're welcome! (although I didn't do anything) |
…belong, to its own file in _parser/_parsing_check.py * Group all exceptions in _exceptions.py * Remove now empty file _excep.py (now redundant with _exceptions.py)
# Conflicts: # libcst/codegen/gen_matcher_classes.py
* Keep old exception messages (avoid breaking-changes for users relying on exception messages) * Move ``get_expected_str`` out of _exceptions.py, where it does not belong, to its own file in _parser/_parsing_check.py
Summary
Before tackling issue #457, there are some bare Exceptions thrown from within the code.
Here is the logic for changes in Exceptions:
ValueErrorwhen issue caused by user inputCSTValidationError&TypeErrorwhen issue occurs during the CST validation processParserSyntaxErrorwhen issue occurs during the parsing processCSTLogicErrorto replace all Exception which contained "Logic error" in the cause messageI'm all for changes if some Exceptions changes are not OK,
In particular, there are some
ParserSyntaxErrorwhich may not be meaningful - with raw_line=0, raw_column=0 paramsTest Plan
Keep the current test plan.