[issue30076] Opcode names BUILD_MAP_UNPACK_WITH_CALL and BUILD_TUPLE_UNPACK_WITH_CALL are too long

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: Sure. -- resolution: -> out of date stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed ___ Python tracker ___

[issue30076] Opcode names BUILD_MAP_UNPACK_WITH_CALL and BUILD_TUPLE_UNPACK_WITH_CALL are too long

Ken Jin added the comment: Serhiy, may I close this issue please? Since 3.10, those long opcodes no longer exist. Issue39320 removed BUILD_TUPLE_UNPACK_WITH_CALL and BUILD_MAP_UNPACK_WITH_CALL from the compiler. The new opcodes have shorter names. -- nosy: +kj

[issue30076] Opcode names BUILD_MAP_UNPACK_WITH_CALL and BUILD_TUPLE_UNPACK_WITH_CALL are too long

Nick Coghlan added the comment: So we'd be going with a naming convention where "VAR" corresponds to the star syntax, and whether it means packing or unpacking, or refers to arguments or parameters is context dependent? I could definitely support that, given that the ambiguity already

[issue30076] Opcode names BUILD_MAP_UNPACK_WITH_CALL and BUILD_TUPLE_UNPACK_WITH_CALL are too long

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: These opcodes are always used with CALL_FUNCTION_EX (which can be used also without any of them). f(*a, *b, **c, **d) 1 0 LOAD_NAME0 (f) 2 LOAD_NAME1 (a) 4 LOAD_NAME2

[issue30076] Opcode names BUILD_MAP_UNPACK_WITH_CALL and BUILD_TUPLE_UNPACK_WITH_CALL are too long

Nick Coghlan added the comment: Reviewing this again now, I think my previous naming suggestion is problematic, as it encourages conflating two different concepts that use similar syntax: * collecting arbitrary positional parameters in a tuple (VAR_POSITIONAL) or arbitrary keyword

[issue30076] Opcode names BUILD_MAP_UNPACK_WITH_CALL and BUILD_TUPLE_UNPACK_WITH_CALL are too long

Change by Serhiy Storchaka : -- versions: +Python 3.9 -Python 3.6, Python 3.7, Python 3.8 ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue30076] Opcode names BUILD_MAP_UNPACK_WITH_CALL and BUILD_TUPLE_UNPACK_WITH_CALL are too long

Zackery Spytz added the comment: I have created a pull request for this issue. Please take a look. -- nosy: +ZackerySpytz ___ Python tracker ___

[issue30076] Opcode names BUILD_MAP_UNPACK_WITH_CALL and BUILD_TUPLE_UNPACK_WITH_CALL are too long

Change by Zackery Spytz : -- keywords: +patch pull_requests: +15199 stage: needs patch -> patch review pull_request: https://github.com/python/cpython/pull/15513 ___ Python tracker

[issue30076] Opcode names BUILD_MAP_UNPACK_WITH_CALL and BUILD_TUPLE_UNPACK_WITH_CALL are too long

Change by Serhiy Storchaka : -- assignee: -> docs@python components: +Documentation nosy: +docs@python stage: -> needs patch versions: +Python 3.6, Python 3.8 ___ Python tracker

[issue30076] Opcode names BUILD_MAP_UNPACK_WITH_CALL and BUILD_TUPLE_UNPACK_WITH_CALL are too long

Nick Coghlan added the comment: I think it should be sufficient connection to describe the link in the documentation as: * BUILD_VAR_POSITIONAL: a variant of BUILD_TUPLE_UNPACK tailored specifically for use in function calls * BUILD_VAR_KEYWORD: a variant of BUILD_MAP_UNPACK tailored

[issue30076] Opcode names BUILD_MAP_UNPACK_WITH_CALL and BUILD_TUPLE_UNPACK_WITH_CALL are too long

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: I like the names BUILD_VAR_POSITIONAL and BUILD_VAR_KEYWORD. The downside is that this breaks relations between them and very similar opcodes BUILD_TUPLE_UNPACK and BUILD_MAP_UNPACK. The only differences between BUILD_*_UNPACK and BUILD_*_UNPACK_WITH_CALL

[issue30076] Opcode names BUILD_MAP_UNPACK_WITH_CALL and BUILD_TUPLE_UNPACK_WITH_CALL are too long

Changes by Jim Fasarakis-Hilliard : -- nosy: +Jim Fasarakis-Hilliard ___ Python tracker ___

[issue30076] Opcode names BUILD_MAP_UNPACK_WITH_CALL and BUILD_TUPLE_UNPACK_WITH_CALL are too long

Nick Coghlan added the comment: If we used the names from inspect.Parameter.kind (https://docs.python.org/3/library/inspect.html#inspect.Parameter.kind) these would become: * BUILD_VAR_POSITIONAL * BUILD_VAR_KEYWORD which would be 20 and 17 letters long, respectively. I think that would

[issue30076] Opcode names BUILD_MAP_UNPACK_WITH_CALL and BUILD_TUPLE_UNPACK_WITH_CALL are too long

New submission from Serhiy Storchaka: Two new opcodes BUILD_MAP_UNPACK_WITH_CALL and BUILD_TUPLE_UNPACK_WITH_CALL (added in 3.5 and 3.6) have too long names (26 and 28 characters). This exceeds the width of the opcode names in the dis module (20 characters). Increasing the width of the column