jez added the comment:
I take the point about breaking backward compatibility. The problem, then, is
in the `ast` documentation, and may not be confined to Python 2.7
The `literal_eval` doc <https://docs.python.org/2/library/ast.html#ast-helpers>
states no more than that the function evaluates a "string containing a Python
literal". The future statement effectively changes the definition of "a Python
literal" but of course, as the official `__future__` doc
<https://docs.python.org/2/reference/simple_stmts.html#future> explains, this
is done for the compilation of each "particular module" in isolation. The
question is left open whether the occurrence of this term in `ast`
documentation should be read as "a Python literal (as defined by the ast module
itself at compile time)", or "a Python literal (as defined by the caller at
compile time)".
More generally, future statements effectively change the definition of the term
"Python syntax", sometimes also simply referred to as "Python". Unfortunately,
the `ast` documentation uses these terms loosely throughout, without
acknowledging that they are mutable. I propose that the `ast` module
documentation flag cases in which the `ast` module's own definitions of
"Python" and "Python syntax" may not match those of a caller who has included
`__future__` statements, leading to unexpected behavior.
I am insufficiently familiar with the full functionality of `ast` to be able to
identify where this is and is not an issue, except in `literal_eval`, but I can
see it could in principle affect Python 3.x too.
--
assignee: -> docs@python
components: +Documentation
nosy: +docs@python
versions: -Python 2.7
___
Python tracker
<https://bugs.python.org/issue35777>
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com