Request: Definition.fullname about jedi HOT 9 CLOSED

os.path.join in Linux is actually posixpath.join

which one do you want? That's not clear for me.

from jedi.

I want os.path.join instead of posixpath.join, as posixpath functions are not in the document.

from jedi.

All right, I think we have to do that with a mapping for builtin modules. Everything else would be too complicated to implement.

from jedi.

What do you think? I just added your example, please add other files as well!

from jedi.

Hi, thanks for the enhancement! When I try full_name on os.path, I got this:

In [2]:
source = """\
import os
os.path"""
lines = source.splitlines()
script = jedi.Script(source, len(lines), len(lines[-1]), None)
definition = script.get_definition()
definition
Out [2]:
[<Definition module genericpath>,
 <Definition module ntpath>,
 <Definition module posixpath>,
 <Definition module genericpath>,
 <Definition module os2emxpath>]

In [3]:
[(d, d.full_name) for d in definition]
Out [3]:
[(<Definition module genericpath>, 'genericpath'),
 (<Definition module ntpath>, 'os.path'),
 (<Definition module posixpath>, 'os.path'),
 (<Definition module genericpath>, 'genericpath'),
 (<Definition module os2emxpath>, 'os.path')]

For my purpose, I want d.full_name to be "os.path", because then I can simply do definition[0].full_name to get full name. Or maybe it is better to have Script.get_full_name(), which returns a string, rather than having Definition.full_name? Having same "full name" for different definitions feels a bit strange (or not?). Sorry, I was not aware of that Script.get_definition might return multiple definitions when I wrote the request, although I already knew that from the other question I asked before.

from jedi.

There won't be another version of this, because there is always a possibility to return two different versions of a path (here it would be genericpath and os.path, I fixed this in the above commit). A script like

if a:
    import foo as path
else:
    from os import path

is always possible. Therefore multiple elements can and should be returned. So I suggest you use this code:

set(d.full_name for d in definition)

if you just want soome element (this would work in the above example). Normally there is only one fullname. If there are multiple fullnames, you have to handle that. I would suggest to let the user choose. If that's not what you want, just take one definition by chance.

from jedi.

I see. It makes sense that library user must decide how to pickup the full name.

I tried another example:

In [4]:
source = """\
import argparse
parser = argparse.ArgumentParser()
parser.add_argument"""
lines = source.splitlines()
script = jedi.Script(source, len(lines), len(lines[-1]), None)
definition = script.get_definition()
definition
Out [4]:
[<Definition def add_argument>]

In [5]:
definition[0].full_name
Out [5]:
'argparse._ActionsContainer.add_argument'

I think definition[0].full_name should return argparse.ArgumentParser.add_argument. But I think current implementation of full_name cannot fix this name, right? Perhaps BaseOutput._mapping should be a map from tuple-of-str to str, instead of a map from str to str, so that you can do something like this (untested)?

head = paths[:-1]
tail = [paths[-1]]
# Try to find the longest match in self._mapping:
while head:
    try:
        tail.append(self._mapping[tuple(head)])
        break
    except KeyError:
        pass
    tail.append(head.pop())
return '.'.join(reversed(tail))

from jedi.

I added some code... I didn't do any testing, so please be sure to test it. Also if it fails, just fix it. :-)

from jedi.

Thanks! I will add mappings when I find some. Hope that there are not too many.

from jedi.