Using ekr-black2, I found the following bug:
Leo subtree:
@path c:/temp/leo
@file a.py
@file b.py
1. Select the *a.py* node. Neither *blacken-files* nor *blacken-files-diff*
find any file to blacken.
2. Select the *@path* node. *Blacken-files-diff *only finds *a.py*, not
*b.py*. (I assume *blacken-files* would do the same but did not test it).
The culprit seems to be *g.findRootsWithPredicate(c, c.p)*. I put a print
statement in to verify 1) and 2).
Otherwise, using *-b* did produce *# @xxx* sentinels on write. Test files
with blackened sentinels did load into Leo with no warnings or apparent
errors.
On Sunday, December 4, 2022 at 11:09:26 AM UTC-5 Edward K. Ream wrote:
> Drat: I hit the "Post Message" button trying to format some text. Here is
> the full post.
>
> Leo issue #2983 <https://github.com/leo-editor/leo-editor/issues/2983>
> suggests supporting so-called *blackened sentinels*, sentinel lines that
> start with "# @" instead of the usual "#@". Such lines can arise in
> external files created by @file after the user reformats the file with
> Black <https://black.readthedocs.io/en/stable/>.
>
> PR #2985 <https://github.com/leo-editor/leo-editor/pull/2985> contains
> the changes, which involve *inherently dangerous* changes to Leo's read
> code. #2983 <https://github.com/leo-editor/leo-editor/issues/2983> gives
> the rationale for accepting the risks involved, which I'll repeat here:
>
> - Leo *cannot *prevent Leonistas from blackening external files
> *unintentionally*. Black's *existence* imposes a burden on Leo.
>
> - Leo *should not* prevent Leonistas from blackening external files
> *intentionally*.
> --black-sentinels can help avoid huge diffs in projects mandating Black.
>
> - Any change to Leo's read/write code is inherently dangerous, but doing
> nothing may be more dangerous in the long run.
>
> *Summary of changes*
>
> Leo has (supposedly) been able to handle blackened sentinels for a long
> time. However, recent tests have exposed problems with Leo's legacy code.
> The new code fixes several bugs, some serious (potentially damaging data!)
> and some less so (crashers).
>
> The PR adds support for --black-sentinels (aka -b), which causes Leo to
> *write* blackened sentinels.
>
> *Testing status*
>
> I have strengthened several unit tests to test for both blackened and
> legacy sentinels.
>
> All of Leo's files pass round-trip read/write tests, both with and without
> -b. This is the strongest test I know of.
>
> I have been eating my own dog food without any serious problems.
>
> *Summary*
>
> PR #2985 <https://github.com/leo-editor/leo-editor/pull/2985> contains
> inherently dangerous changes to Leo's read code.
>
> I have tested the code as well as I can, but additional testing seems
> wise before merging PR #2985
> <https://github.com/leo-editor/leo-editor/pull/2985> into devel. Please
> test that branch now.
>
> I'll wait about a week before doing the merge. Please report any problems
> immediately.
>
> Edward
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"leo-editor" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/4107e53f-b5f0-496e-b31c-fd713ee48a6cn%40googlegroups.com.
