llnl.util.filesystem.find: restore old error handling #47463
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
alalazo
approved these changes
Nov 6, 2024
scheibelp
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 7, 2024
This reverts commit a31c525.
haampie
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 8, 2024
This was referenced Nov 25, 2024
fryeguy52
pushed a commit
to fryeguy52/spack
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 17, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The point of #41945 was to introduce a
max_depthparameter tollnl.util.filesystem.find(root, ...).However, it also made
find(root, ...)more pedantic, as it started raisingOSErrorwhenos.stat(root)failed with any error code except ENOENT, andstarted raising
ValueErrorifrootis not a directory.This should not have been part of the PR, since there's a disagreement about
how useful this is, as it requires the call site to be defensive, and there are
many call sites possibly also in private repositories. Apart from that raising a
mix of OSError and ValueError seems awkward, and no tests were added
to cover the unhappy code path. How to handle errors best can then be settled
better after
releases/v0.23branches off.This commit restores the 8 year status quo of not erroring (the recursive
search was based on
os.walk, and the non-recursive just onglob, bothof which ignore all
OSErrors by default).