-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.9k
Tighten FakeInfo and fix crashes in --quick mode #3304
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
Conversation
No, it's not fixed. Using the recipe from #3281 I still get a crash on the second
I can dig into this more if you want to. |
Could you please show a larger part of the traceback? (It will be helpful since I can't reproduce this.) |
Sorry! Here it is.
|
Maybe what also might help: the line where it fails is a call to a static method on a class that was locally imported (on the line before, inside a method). |
@gvanrossum |
Sadly, still a crash:
|
OK, but it is better now, it hits one of asserts that I just put there. I will investigate further. |
@gvanrossum It looks like I can reproduce now your crash, I have very similar traceback. |
No crash! |
Have you tried only |
Hm, I don't see that "stale cache" message at all in my output. Should I? Does this mean I'm not testing the right things? Here's how I test:
(Where |
Interesting, in my crash scenario this message appeared where the crash previously happened.
Not necessarily, my idea is very simple: in This might sound strange, but I think it is better than always giving an error. Maybe those "unfixed" instances are actually not interesting for user. The user will only see this message when doing something with "unfixed" types. Also, it is clear that |
We're getting close to the code freeze for the release. Do you think this should go in (then I can make time to review) or not (then I'll punt until after the release)? |
I think we probably should wait with this. On one hand it would be better to expose the "bug-searching" |
I think that's a wise decision. If Jukka disagrees he can merge this when he emerges tomorrow morning. |
This has some overlap with #3304.
This has some overlap with #3304.
I can actually no longer repro the crash I saw, which could mean any number of things. I propose to finish the review and merge this, and then we'll see. |
The idea was proposed by Jukka in #3285 (comment)
This could (hopefully) fix #3281 for real.
Also fixes #3278
Guido, could you please try to crash this with your code base?