pybabel extract: Support multiple keywords with the same name/arity #1157
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
Extend keywords dict to support multiple keywords with same name/arity Fixes python-babel#1067
Extend keywords dict to support multiple keywords with same name/arity Fixes python-babel#1067
…udent/babel into allow-multiple-keywords
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Extend pybabel extract's keywords dict format to support multiple keywords with same function name and number of arguments.
Fixes #1067 : pybabel extract command from CLI only respects the first argument passed into keywords
I've been working on a fix for this and I have it working. I've had to extend the keywords dict format to allow for multiple specs per number of arguments, but I've made sure the old format is still accepted (and generated by default, if the extended format isn't required), and all existing unit tests still pass without changes. However I feel my code isn't the most elegant so I would welcome feedback.
The main issue as I see it is that I've used tuples to contain the multiple specs. This creates a situation where we can have several nested tuples and it's difficult to distinguish a tuple for an individual spec from a tuple enclosing (potentially) multiple specs. Would it be more suitable to use a list instead when we need to store multiple specs in the dictionary, or would this introduce too much overhead/potential errors?