Why does `@edit` fail with keyword argument?

question
#1

With Julia-v1.0:

julia> @edit isapprox(10, 11; atol = 2)
ERROR: could not determine location of method definition
Stacktrace:
 [1] functionloc at .\reflection.jl:957 [inlined]
 [2] functionloc at .\reflection.jl:967 [inlined]
 [3] edit(::Function, ::Any) at C:\cygwin\home\Administrator\buildbot\worker\package_win64\build\usr
\share\julia\stdlib\v1.0\InteractiveUtils\src\editless.jl:93
 [4] top-level scope at C:\cygwin\home\Administrator\buildbot\worker\package_win64\build\usr\share\j
ulia\stdlib\v1.0\InteractiveUtils\src\macros.jl:15

In fact, this has been the case for a while, at least can be traced back to Julia-v0.6.4:

julia> @edit isapprox(10, 11; atol = 2)
ERROR: could not determine location of method definition

Or should I expect @edit to be failing in the presence of any keyword arguments?

Retrospectively, both ASTInterpreter and ASTInterpreter2 fail with any keyword argument as well. But that’s another issue…

#2

The keyword argument call is lowered to:

julia> Core.kwfunc(isapprox)((atol=2,), isapprox, 10, 11)
true

so the actual call is to a kwfunc function and the macro is not smart enough to figure out how to find the original keyword argument function yet.

#3

So it’s a bug but wontfix?

#4

Not really, more like, making the macro able to handle this would be very nice it just currently doesn’t.

#5

Thanks! Cool if one day this can be improved. The fail is just a bit glaring.

#6

Ref https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/20295

#7

Thanks for pointing out. Didn’t search thoroughly. Guilty.

Btw, that’s way back in the history. Almost two years.

#8

The downside of open source is that even things everyone agrees should be fixed, won’t be fixed if no one takes the time to fix it. I for one am thankful for all the people spending time making this language awesome!

(Not implying you meant different :slight_smile:)