Disabled two tests that require a preinstalled build of Mathics to
work, which is incompatible with the way nix runs them.
[Bjørn: remove unrelated disabling on Python 3]
Regression introduced by 5f55788531.
The commit not only changes documentation, but also changed a few
variable names. One of them is $i which now is $f and it contains the
name of the file to wrap.
This was accidentally found by @Profpatsch (thanks!) who found himself
getting the basename of the last patch file to end up in sys.argv[0].
The reason for this is that $i is used in the for loop of the generic
patchPhase and thus is reused later when the Python file is to be
wrapped.
I have also added a small comment noting about this, to be sure that
this won't accidentally occur the next time someone changes variable
names.
Signed-off-by: aszlig <aszlig@redmoonstudios.org>
Many (less easily automatically converted) old-style strings
remain.
Where there was any possible ambiguity about the exact version or
variant intended, nothing was changed. IANAL, nor a search robot.
Use `with stdenv.lib` wherever it makes sense.
This should fix#7366 for now, but using the (IMHO) pragmatic approach
of extending the sed expression to recognize strings.
However, this approach is obviously not parsing the full AST, nor does
it wrap Python itself (as pointed out by @spwhitt in #7366) but tries to
match Python strings as best as possible without getting TOO unreadable.
We also use a little bit of Nix to help generating the SED expression,
because doing the whole quote matching block over and over again would
be quite repetitious and error-prone to change. The reason why I'm using
imap here is that we need to have unique labels to avoid jumping into
the wrong branch.
So the new expression is not only able to match continous regions of
triple-quoted strings, but also regions with only one quote character
(even with escaped inner quotes) and empty strings.
However, what it doesn't correctly recognize is something like this:
"string1" "string2" "multi
line
string"
Which is very unlikely that we'll find something like this in the wild.
Of course, we could handle it as well, but it would mean that we need to
substitute the current line into hold space until we're finished parsing
the strings, branch off to another label where we match multiline
strings of all sorts and swap hold/pattern space and finally print the
result. So to summarize: The SED expression would be 3 to 4 times bigger
than now and we gain very little from that.
Signed-off-by: aszlig <aszlig@redmoonstudios.org>
