Python Script editor.replace Bug? concerning the characters '(' and ')'

Alan Kilborn

I just took a very quick glance at your latest script above. Nice job, it seems like you are learning and advancing as you go; always a good thing.

One thing that struck me in my quick look was you pass “left” and “right” was integers but the receiving function arguments reference “True” but then later in the function you go back to integers again. You really should pick either integer or boolean and stay with it; I’d suggest the booleans in this case.

You rapidly get into “trouble” with this approach, e.g. a line like this: elif left&~int( right )&compress:. I’d suggest that is much better as: elif left and not right and compress:; no need to resort to bit level manipulation operator &.

But these are Python things, not directly related to Notepad++. Hopefully it is OK to be “off topic” if one is attempting to help one become a better programmer so their N++ scripts will be improved.

Mark Olson

@Robert-Jablko

Agree with @Alan-Kilborn that you are getting a lot better at writing good Pythonic code.

I won’t get into details, but you are going to have a very hard time correctly ignoring strings and comments without using the (*SKIP)(*FAIL) backtracking control verbs in your regexes. This is a problem for you in particular because NPP’s Boost supports those operators but Python’s re does not.

EDIT: For example, an efficient regex to match the character c only in lines that don’t start with leading whitespace might look like (?-si)^\h+\S.*$(*SKIP)(*FAIL)|c, but that regex is not valid for Python’s re.

Alan Kilborn

@Mark-Olson said:

…using the (*SKIP)(*FAIL) backtracking control verbs in your regexes. This is a problem for you in particular because NPP’s Boost supports those operators but Python’s re does not.

If it comes to that, there are some techniques where you can avoid usage of Python re module entirely. I call it the hidden-third-editor technique, look at it HERE.

Robert Jablko

@Alan-Kilborn
@Mark-Olson

Thank you :)

Integers vs. Booleans

They are booleans, 100%. I got tired of writing True and False and the line got so long that I resumed to 1 and 0. I also thought it’s clever, but you are right. I should stick to clean coding. I will switch back to True and False.
Same thing with ‘&’ and ‘~’. The code was clean with ‘and’, ‘not’, ‘or’, but while searching for all operators, I found these just had to apply them. I actually learned something: ~ will be deprecated and while running he told me to use ~int( ) instead. I will go back to clean code.

Ignoring string and comments

At the moment I have had enough of this project and need a pause. But once I feel like it, I will first solve it with Python methods, either own loop and/or maybe with a library like tokenize. To me that is npp-related, because it has to run in the python-script.
After that I will go back to Booster:Regex, find the right combinations and then maybe a makro.
I will keep the hidden-third-editor in mind.

Alan Kilborn

@Robert-Jablko said:

I got tired of writing True and False and the line got so long that I resumed to 1 and 0

If you are writing code like if foo == True or bar == False, then, well, stop that.
Just do if foo or not bar and you lines are shorter.

~ will be deprecated and while running he told me to use ~int( ) instead

The ~ can hardly become deprecated as it has legitimate use. The way your earlier code used it was not really “legitimate”. Who is “he”?

(sorry, more off-topic stuff)

Robert Jablko

@Alan-Kilborn

not if foo=True, just like you suggested, check out below with no integers and no bitwise operators:

if left and right and compress:
       text=re.sub( rf'(\s*)({re_pattern})(\s*)', r'\2', text )
   elif left and not right and compress:

text=manipulate_operators( text, operators, compress=True, left=True, right=True )

The ~ will be deprecated. ‘HE’ is the machine, the code, the all-knowing algorithmn that always tells what goes wrong :)

elif left and ~ right and compress:

Warning (from warnings module):
  File "MyPyFormat npp 08 ~ deprecated.py", line 27
    text=re.sub( rf'(\s+)({re_pattern})', r'\2', text )
DeprecationWarning: Bitwise inversion '~' on bool is deprecated and will be removed in Python 3.16. This returns the bitwise inversion of the underlying int object and is usually not what you expect from negating a bool. Use the 'not' operator for boolean negation or ~int(x) if you really want the bitwise inversion of the underlying int.

Alan Kilborn

@Robert-Jablko said:

DeprecationWarning: Bitwise inversion ‘~’ on bool is deprecated

This is quite different from your original (blanket) statement of ~ is deprecated.

Robert Jablko

@Alan-Kilborn

don’t want to split hairs, but I said ‘will be deprecated’

Alan Kilborn

@Robert-Jablko said:

but I said ‘will be deprecated’

Well, you were wrong in saying that, as well.
Look at the error message you received:
DeprecationWarning: Bitwise inversion '~' on bool is deprecated
Clearly that says “is deprecated”.
Another possibility is that you don’t truly know what deprecated means.

This offshoot discussion could have been avoided if you’d just pasted the text of the entire warning here. Posting something like ~ will be deprecated without any qualifiers is what “got me going”, as that is patently ridiculous. With the qualifiers from the warning message, it makes perfect sense.

Robert Jablko

@Alan-Kilborn

ah, is deprecated and will be removed. Point to you ;)