Fix opcode args by ShaharNaveh · Pull Request #6649 · RustPython/RustPython

coderabbitai

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The opcode module's validity checks are simplified to rely on a unified validation approach, while expanding the set of recognized instructions in has_name and has_jump. Error handling for invalid stack arguments is improved with detailed type information, and boolean extraction is standardized.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Change Summary
Opcode Validation & Instruction Set Expansion `crates/stdlib/src/opcode.rs`	Refactored has_const, has_name, has_jump, has_free, and has_local to use unified `Self::is_valid(opcode)` checks. Expanded has_name to include ImportName, LoadAttr, LoadMethod, LoadNameAny, and StoreLocal. Expanded has_jump to cover JumpIfNotExcMatch, JumpIfTrueOrPop, and additional jump-like instructions. Improved stack_effect error handling to return detailed type error messages for non-integer oparg values. Replaced pattern-based boolean extraction with `v.try_to_bool(vm)`. Removed unused PyBool and PyNone imports.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~20 minutes

Possibly related PRs

Sort Instruction enum & related match arms #6322 — Instruction enum reorganization and new/renamed opcodes that directly align with the expanded instruction sets being added to has_name and has_jump checks.

Poem

🐰 A rabbit hops through opcodes clean,
Where jumps and names now widely seen,
With errors clear and checks so tight,
The code simplifies—what a sight!
No more redundant paths to chase,
Just unified validation's grace! ✨

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Title check	❓ Inconclusive	The title 'Fix opcode args' is vague and does not clearly convey what specific issue is being fixed or what the main change accomplishes.	Use a more descriptive title that explains the specific fix, such as 'Refactor opcode validation and improve stack effect error handling' or 'Simplify opcode checks and enhance type error messages'.

✅ Passed checks (2 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	Docstring coverage is 100.00% which is sufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.

✨ Finishing touches

📝 Generate docstrings

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}