Emulation of compile() #
While many useful operations may take place between parsing and
bytecode generation, the simplest operation is to do nothing. For
this purpose, using the
parser module to produce an intermediate data structure is
equivalent to the code
>>> code = compile('a + 5', 'file.py', 'eval')
>>> a = 5
>>> eval(code)
10
The equivalent operation using the parser module is somewhat longer, and allows
the intermediate internal parse tree to be retained as an AST
object:
>>> import parser
>>> ast = parser.expr('a + 5')
>>> code = ast.compile('file.py')
>>> a = 5
>>> eval(code)
10
An application which needs both AST and code objects can package
this code into readily available functions:
import parser
def load_suite(source_string):
ast = parser.suite(source_string)
return ast, ast.compile()
def load_expression(source_string):
ast = parser.expr(source_string)
return ast, ast.compile()
Some applications benefit from direct access to the parse tree.
The remainder of this section demonstrates how the parse tree
provides access to module documentation defined in docstrings
without requiring that the code being examined be loaded into a
running interpreter via
import. This can be very useful for performing analyses of
untrusted code.
Generally, the example will demonstrate how the parse tree may
be traversed to distill interesting information. Two functions and
a set of classes are developed which provide programmatic access to
high level function and class definitions provided by a module. The
classes extract information from the parse tree and provide access
to the information at a useful semantic level, one function
provides a simple low-level pattern matching capability, and the
other function defines a high-level interface to the classes by
handling file operations on behalf of the caller. All source files
mentioned here which are not part of the Python installation are
located in the Demo/parser/ directory of the distribution.
The dynamic nature of Python allows the programmer a great deal
of flexibility, but most modules need only a limited measure of
this when defining classes, functions, and methods. In this
example, the only definitions that will be considered are those
which are defined in the top level of their context, e.g., a
function defined by a def
statement at column zero of a module, but not a function defined
within a branch of an if … else construct, though there are
some good reasons for doing so in some situations. Nesting of
definitions will be handled by the code developed in the
example.
To construct the upper-level extraction methods, we need to know
what the parse tree structure looks like and how much of it we
actually need to be concerned about. Python uses a moderately deep
parse tree so there are a large number of intermediate nodes. It is
important to read and understand the formal grammar used by Python.
This is specified in the file Grammar/Grammar in the distribution.
Consider the simplest case of interest when searching for
docstrings: a module consisting of a docstring and nothing else.
(See file docstring.py.)
"""Some documentation.
"""
Using the interpreter to take a look at the parse tree, we find
a bewildering mass of numbers and parentheses, with the
documentation buried deep in nested tuples.
>>> import parser
>>> import pprint
>>> ast = parser.suite(open('docstring.py').read())
>>> tup = ast.totuple()
>>> pprint.pprint(tup)
(257,
(264,
(265,
(266,
(267,
(307,
(287,
(288,
(289,
(290,
(292,
(293,
(294,
(295,
(296,
(297,
(298,
(299,
(300, (3, '"""Some documentation.\n"""'))))))))))))))))),
(4, ''))),
(4, ''),
(0, ''))
The numbers at the first element of each node in the tree are
the node types; they map directly to terminal and non-terminal
symbols in the grammar. Unfortunately, they are represented as
integers in the internal representation, and the Python structures
generated do not change that. However, the symbol and token modules provide symbolic names for the
node types and dictionaries which map from the integers to the
symbolic names for the node types.
In the output presented above, the outermost tuple contains four
elements: the integer 257 and three additional tuples.
Node type 257 has the symbolic name
file_input. Each of these inner tuples contains an integer
as the first element; these integers, 264,
4, and 0, represent the node types
stmt, NEWLINE, and ENDMARKER,
respectively. Note that these values may change depending on the
version of Python you are using; consult symbol.py and token.py for
details of the mapping. It should be fairly clear that the
outermost node is related primarily to the input source rather than
the contents of the file, and may be disregarded for the moment.
The stmt node is much more interesting. In particular,
all docstrings are found in subtrees which are formed exactly as
this node is formed, with the only difference being the string
itself. The association between the docstring in a similar tree and
the defined entity (class, function, or module) which it describes
is given by the position of the docstring subtree within the tree
defining the described structure.
By replacing the actual docstring with something to signify a
variable component of the tree, we allow a simple pattern matching
approach to check any given subtree for equivalence to the general
pattern for docstrings. Since the example demonstrates information
extraction, we can safely require that the tree be in tuple form
rather than list form, allowing a simple variable representation to
be ['variable_name']. A simple recursive function can
implement the pattern matching, returning a Boolean and a
dictionary of variable name to value mappings. (See file
example.py.)
from types import ListType, TupleType
def match(pattern, data, vars=None):
if vars is None:
vars = {}
if type(pattern) is ListType:
vars[pattern[0]] = data
return 1, vars
if type(pattern) is not TupleType:
return (pattern == data), vars
if len(data) != len(pattern):
return 0, vars
for pattern, data in map(None, pattern, data):
same, vars = match(pattern, data, vars)
if not same:
break
return same, vars
Using this simple representation for syntactic variables and the
symbolic node types, the pattern for the candidate docstring
subtrees becomes fairly readable. (See file example.py.)
import symbol
import token
DOCSTRING_STMT_PATTERN = (
symbol.stmt,
(symbol.simple_stmt,
(symbol.small_stmt,
(symbol.expr_stmt,
(symbol.testlist,
(symbol.test,
(symbol.and_test,
(symbol.not_test,
(symbol.comparison,
(symbol.expr,
(symbol.xor_expr,
(symbol.and_expr,
(symbol.shift_expr,
(symbol.arith_expr,
(symbol.term,
(symbol.factor,
(symbol.power,
(symbol.atom,
(token.STRING, ['docstring'])
)))))))))))))))),
(token.NEWLINE, '')
))
Using the match function
with this pattern, extracting the module docstring from the parse
tree created previously is easy:
>>> found, vars = match(DOCSTRING_STMT_PATTERN, tup[1])
>>> found
1
>>> vars
{'docstring': '"""Some documentation.\n"""'}
Once specific data can be extracted from a location where it is
expected, the question of where information can be expected needs
to be answered. When dealing with docstrings, the answer is fairly
simple: the docstring is the first stmt node in a code
block (file_input or suite node types). A
module consists of a single file_input node, and class
and function definitions each contain exactly one
suite node. Classes and functions are readily identified as
subtrees of code block nodes which start with (stmt,
(compound_stmt, (classdef, ... or (stmt,
(compound_stmt, (funcdef, .... Note that these subtrees
cannot be matched by match
since it does not support multiple sibling nodes to match without
regard to number. A more elaborate matching function could be used
to overcome this limitation, but this is sufficient for the
example.
Given the ability to determine whether a statement might be a
docstring and extract the actual string from the statement, some
work needs to be performed to walk the parse tree for an entire
module and extract information about the names defined in each
context of the module and associate any docstrings with the names.
The code to perform this work is not complicated, but bears some
explanation.
The public interface to the classes is straightforward and
should probably be somewhat more flexible. Each “major”
block of the module is described by an object providing several
methods for inquiry and a constructor which accepts at least the
subtree of the complete parse tree which it represents. The ModuleInfo constructor
accepts an optional name parameter since it cannot
otherwise determine the name of the module.
The public classes include ClassInfo, FunctionInfo, and ModuleInfo. All objects provide the
methods get_name, get_docstring, get_class_names, and
get_class_info. The
ClassInfo objects support
get_method_names
and get_method_info
while the other classes provide get_function_names and
get_function_info.
Within each of the forms of code block that the public classes
represent, most of the required information is in the same form and
is accessed in the same way, with classes having the distinction
that functions defined at the top level are referred to as
“methods.” Since the difference in nomenclature
reflects a real semantic distinction from functions defined outside
of a class, the implementation needs to maintain the distinction.
Hence, most of the functionality of the public classes can be
implemented in a common base class, SuiteInfoBase, with the accessors for
function and method information provided elsewhere. Note that there
is only one class which represents function and method information;
this parallels the use of the
def statement to define both types of elements.
Most of the accessor functions are declared in SuiteInfoBase and do not need to be
overridden by subclasses. More importantly, the extraction of most
information from a parse tree is handled through a method called by
the SuiteInfoBase
constructor. The example code for most of the classes is clear when
read alongside the formal grammar, but the method which recursively
creates new information objects requires further examination. Here
is the relevant part of the SuiteInfoBase definition from
example.py:
class SuiteInfoBase:
_docstring = ''
_name = ''
def __init__(self, tree = None):
self._class_info = {}
self._function_info = {}
if tree:
self._extract_info(tree)
def _extract_info(self, tree):
# extract docstring
if len(tree) == 2:
found, vars = match(DOCSTRING_STMT_PATTERN[1], tree[1])
else:
found, vars = match(DOCSTRING_STMT_PATTERN, tree[3])
if found:
self._docstring = eval(vars['docstring'])
# discover inner definitions
for node in tree[1:]:
found, vars = match(COMPOUND_STMT_PATTERN, node)
if found:
cstmt = vars['compound']
if cstmt[0] == symbol.funcdef:
name = cstmt[2][1]
self._function_info[name] = FunctionInfo(cstmt)
elif cstmt[0] == symbol.classdef:
name = cstmt[2][1]
self._class_info[name] = ClassInfo(cstmt)
After initializing some internal state, the constructor calls
the _extract_info
method. This method performs the bulk of the information extraction
which takes place in the entire example. The extraction has two
distinct phases: the location of the docstring for the parse tree
passed in, and the discovery of additional definitions within the
code block represented by the parse tree.
The initial if test
determines whether the nested suite is of the “short
form” or the “long form.” The short form is used
when the code block is on the same line as the definition of the
code block, as in
def square(x): "Square an argument."; return x ** 2
while the long form uses an indented block and allows nested
definitions:
def make_power(exp):
"Make a function that raises an argument to the exponent `exp'."
def raiser(x, y=exp):
return x ** y
return raiser
When the short form is used, the code block may contain a
docstring as the first, and possibly only, small_stmt
element. The extraction of such a docstring is slightly different
and requires only a portion of the complete pattern used in the
more common case. As implemented, the docstring will only be found
if there is only one small_stmt node in the
simple_stmt node. Since most functions and methods which use
the short form do not provide a docstring, this may be considered
sufficient. The extraction of the docstring proceeds using the match function as described
above, and the value of the docstring is stored as an attribute of
the SuiteInfoBase
object.
After docstring extraction, a simple definition discovery
algorithm operates on the stmt nodes of the
suite node. The special case of the short form is not
tested; since there are no stmt nodes in the short
form, the algorithm will silently skip the single
simple_stmt node and correctly not discover any nested
definitions.
Each statement in the code block is categorized as a class
definition, function or method definition, or something else. For
the definition statements, the name of the element defined is
extracted and a representation object appropriate to the definition
is created with the defining subtree passed as an argument to the
constructor. The representation objects are stored in instance
variables and may be retrieved by name using the appropriate
accessor methods.
The public classes provide any accessors required which are more
specific than those provided by the SuiteInfoBase class, but the real
extraction algorithm remains common to all forms of code blocks. A
high-level function can be used to extract the complete set of
information from a source file. (See file example.py.)
def get_docs(fileName):
import os
import parser
source = open(fileName).read()
basename = os.path.basename(os.path.splitext(fileName)[0])
ast = parser.suite(source)
return ModuleInfo(ast.totuple(), basename)
This provides an easy-to-use interface to the documentation of a
module. If information is required which is not extracted by the
code of this example, the code may be extended at clearly defined
points to provide additional capabilities.