Repository navigation
Non-literal list concatenation and sorting: TypeError: t.py_sort is not a function #679
Description
Hi,
sorting a non-literal concatenated list causes the error: TypeError: t.py_sort is not a function. While the lists are literals, the concatenation is done by variables and the plus operator.
a = [5,6,7]
b = [8,9,10]
t = a + b
t.sort()
print(t)
Activity
vkbsb commentedon Oct 4, 2019
have you tried t.js_sort() instead?
darthglowball commentedon Oct 4, 2019
@vkbsb no, thanks, but I fixed it with some after-processing on the Javascript by changing
a + btoa.concat(b)while keeping py_sort. But it's still a Transcrypt bug. I want to keep my code as Pythonic as possible, so I think using a js_sort would defeat that purpose (maybe not for this example, but for others).fzzylogic commentedon Oct 5, 2019
@darthglowball You may want to enabe operator overloading when compiling (using -o switch for global, or pragma('opov') for local).
darthglowball commentedon Oct 5, 2019
@fzzylogic something happens now, but in Firefox I get the incorrect result
[10, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]. Nevermind my after-processing solution witha.concat(b): it produces the same incorrect result. Same with using Javascript's .sort() without imported Transcrypt variables. Looks like Javascript has this way of sorting that I don't understand.darthglowball commentedon Oct 5, 2019
Even with the -o switch, you get a py_sort in the generated code:
That doesn't behave like a Python sort (see previous post).
AlexECX commentedon Oct 26, 2019
In the transcrypt runtime.js the sort function used is the javascript
.sort()(__sort__function, Line:1976). The problem is that, in javascript,.sort()treats strings and/or numbers as strings and sort alphabetically. To correct this, Line:1976 should be changed from:iterable.sort ();to:
iterable.sort ((a,b) => a > b ? 1 : -(1));Even better would be to change Line:1972 and Line:1976 to use
__gt__(a,b)instead ofa > b.@darthglowball incidentally,
.py_sortwill branch to a code section that does exactly what this fix will do when using thekeyparameter of the python.sort(). Usingt.sort(lambda a:a)will sort correctly.AlexECX commentedon Oct 28, 2019
related to #605
AlexECX commentedon Oct 28, 2019
More precisely in
transcrypt/modules/org/transcrypt/__runtime__.py:107| iterable.sort () # JavaScript sortcould be :
107| iterable.sort (lambda a, b: 1 if a > b else -1)Output:
darthglowball commentedon Oct 28, 2019
@AlexECX yes, Python
t.sort()maps to Javascriptt.sort(function(a,b){return a>b})but while Transcrypt allows a positional or keyword argument in sort, it should be a keyword argument in Python 2.7.16 & 3.7.2.AlexECX commentedon Oct 28, 2019
Currently Transcrypts
.sort()maps to Javascript's.sort(), which is why it sorts alphabetically. Mapping it to.sort ((a,b) => a > b ? 1 : -(1))instead will resolve the sorting order. (Note that.sort(function(a,b){return a>b})has the same problem, at least in chrome).I believe the Transcrypt
sort()signature is practically the same as Python's (key = None, reverse = False), but currently the arguments are not passed properly (see #687).darthglowball commentedon Oct 29, 2019
@AlexECX you're right about Chrome giving the incorrect result with
.sort(function(a,b){return a>b}). Same problem with Opera. Firefox does it correctly..sort ((a,b) => a > b ? 1 : -(1))works on all three. Good catch.JennaSys commentedon Jul 6, 2024
This has been implemented in the dev_3.9.3 branch to be released in v3.9.3
JennaSys commentedon Jul 17, 2024
Merged to master on PR #876