[issue25474] Weird behavior when setting f_trace in a context manager

[Xavier de Gaye]

Xavier de Gaye added the comment:

The difference lies in the line numbers. When tracing lines, the interpreter operates on the basis of physical lines, not logical lines (https://docs.python.org/3/reference/lexical_analysis.html#line-structure).  The local trace function is called on the first instruction of each physical line (see the comment in maybe_call_line_trace() in Python/ceval.c).

In the first case of as_context.py, the 'zero' case, we have:

 25          74 SETUP_EXCEPT            49 (to 126)

 27          77 LOAD_NAME                6 (Context)
             80 CALL_FUNCTION            0 (0 positional, 0 keyword pair)
             83 SETUP_WITH              20 (to 106)
             86 STORE_NAME               7 (zero)

 28          89 LOAD_NAME                8 (print)
             92 LOAD_CONST               5 ('zero')
             95 LOAD_NAME                7 (zero)
             ...

After 'CALL_FUNCTION' has been run and the trace function set up, the __raise() local trace function is invoked for the first time upon running the 'LOAD_NAME' instruction, since 'SETUP_WITH' and 'STORE_NAME' are not the first instruction of line 27.

In the 'two' case, we have:

 41     >>  214 SETUP_EXCEPT            49 (to 266)

 42         217 LOAD_NAME                6 (Context)
            220 CALL_FUNCTION            0 (0 positional, 0 keyword pair)
            223 SETUP_WITH              20 (to 246)

 43         226 STORE_NAME              11 (two)

 44         229 LOAD_NAME                8 (print)
            232 LOAD_CONST               9 ('two')
            235 LOAD_NAME               11 (two)
            ....

Here the __raise() local trace function is invoked for the first time upon running the 'STORE_NAME' instruction.

----------

_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue25474>
_______________________________________