Metadata-Version: 2.1
Name: x-python
Version: 1.5.0
Summary: Python cross-version byte-code interpeter
Home-page: http://github.com/rocky/xpython
Author: Rocky Bernstein, Ned Batchelder, Paul Swartz, Allison Kaptur and others
Author-email: rb@dustyfeet.com
License: UNKNOWN
Description: |TravisCI| |CircleCI| |Pypi Installs| |Latest Version| |Supported Python Versions|
        
        x-python
        --------
        
        This is a CPython bytecode interpreter written Python.
        
        You can use this to:
        
        * Learn about how the internals of CPython works since this models that
        * Experiment with additional opcodes, or ways to change the run-time environment
        * Use as a sandboxed environment for trying pieces of execution
        * Have one Python program that runs multiple versions of Python bytecode.
        * Use in a dynamic fuzzer or in coholic execution for analysis
        
        The ability to run Python bytecode as far back as 2.4 from Python 3.10
        I find pretty neat. (Even more could easily be added).
        
        Also, The sandboxed environment in a debugger I find
        interesting. (Note: currently environments are not sandboxed that
        well, but I am working towards that.)
        
        Since there is a separate execution, and traceback stack,
        inside a debugger you can try things out in the middle of a debug
        session without effecting the real execution. On the other hand if a
        sequence of executions works out, it is possible to copy this (under
        certain circumstances) back into CPython's execution stack.
        
        Going the other way, I have hooked in `trepan3k
        <https://pypi.python.org/pypi/trepan3k>`_ into this interpreter so you
        have a pdb/gdb like debugger also with the ability to step bytecode
        instructions.
        
        To experiment with faster ways to support trace callbacks such as
        those used in a debugger. In particular added an instruction to
        support fast breakpoints and breakpointing on a particular instruction
        that doesn't happen to be on a line boundary. I believe this could
        could and should be ported back to CPython and there would be benefit.
        (Python 3.8 supports the ability to save additional frame information which
        is where the original opcode is stored. It just needs the `BRKPT` opcode)
        
        Although this is far in the future, suppose you to add a race
        detector? It might be easier to prototype it in Python here. (This
        assumes the interpreter supports threading well, I suspect it doesn't)
        
        Another unexplored avenue implied above is mixing interpretation and
        direct CPython execution. In fact, there are bugs so this happens
        right now, but it will be turned into a feature. Some functions or
        classes you may want to not run under a slow interpreter while others
        you do want to run under the interpreter.
        
        
        Examples:
        +++++++++
        
        What to know instructions get run when you write some simple code?
        Try this:
        
        ::
        
           $ xpython -vc "x, y = 2, 3; x **= y"
           INFO:xpython.vm:L. 1   @  0: LOAD_CONST (2, 3)
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @  2: UNPACK_SEQUENCE 2
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @  4: STORE_NAME (2) x
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @  6: STORE_NAME (3) y
           INFO:xpython.vm:L. 1   @  8: LOAD_NAME x
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @ 10: LOAD_NAME y
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @ 12: INPLACE_POWER (2, 3)
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @ 14: STORE_NAME (8) x
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @ 16: LOAD_CONST None
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @ 18: RETURN_VALUE (None)
        
        Option ``-c`` is the same as Python's flag (program passed in as string)
        and ``-v`` is also analogus Python's flag. Here, it shows the bytecode
        instructions run.
        
        Note that the disassembly above in the dynamic trace above gives a
        little more than what you'd see from a static disassembler from
        Python's ``dis`` module. In particular, the ``STORE_NAME``
        instructions show the *value* that is store, e.g. "2" at instruction
        offset 4 into name ``x``. Similarly ``INPLACE_POWER`` shows the operands, 2 and 3, which is how the value
        8 is derived as the operand of the next instruction, ``STORE_NAME``.
        
        Want more like the execution stack stack and block stack in addition? Add another `v`:
        
        ::
        
           $ xpython -vvc "x, y = 2, 3; x **= y"
        
           DEBUG:xpython.vm:make_frame: code=<code object <module> at 0x7f8018507db0, file "<string x, y = 2, 3; x **= y>", line 1>, callargs={}, f_globals=(<class 'dict'>, 140188140947488), f_locals=(<class 'NoneType'>, 93856967704000)
           DEBUG:xpython.vm:<Frame at 0x7f80184c1e50: '<string x, y = 2, 3; x **= y>':1 @-1>
           DEBUG:xpython.vm:  frame.stack: []
           DEBUG:xpython.vm:  blocks     : []
           INFO:xpython.vm:L. 1   @  0: LOAD_CONST (2, 3) <module> in <string x, y = 2, 3; x **= y>:1
           DEBUG:xpython.vm:  frame.stack: [(2, 3)]
           DEBUG:xpython.vm:  blocks     : []
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @  2: UNPACK_SEQUENCE 2 <module> in <string x, y = 2, 3; x **= y>:1
           DEBUG:xpython.vm:  frame.stack: [3, 2]
           DEBUG:xpython.vm:  blocks     : []
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @  4: STORE_NAME (2) x <module> in <string x, y = 2, 3; x **= y>:1
           DEBUG:xpython.vm:  frame.stack: [3]
           DEBUG:xpython.vm:  blocks     : []
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @  6: STORE_NAME (3) y <module> in <string x, y = 2, 3; x **= y>:1
           DEBUG:xpython.vm:  frame.stack: []
           DEBUG:xpython.vm:  blocks     : []
           INFO:xpython.vm:L. 1   @  8: LOAD_NAME x <module> in <string x, y = 2, 3; x **= y>:1
           DEBUG:xpython.vm:  frame.stack: [2]
           DEBUG:xpython.vm:  blocks     : []
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @ 10: LOAD_NAME y <module> in <string x, y = 2, 3; x **= y>:1
           DEBUG:xpython.vm:  frame.stack: [2, 3]
           DEBUG:xpython.vm:  blocks     : []
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @ 12: INPLACE_POWER (2, 3)  <module> in <string x, y = 2, 3; x **= y>:1
           DEBUG:xpython.vm:  frame.stack: [8]
           DEBUG:xpython.vm:  blocks     : []
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @ 14: STORE_NAME (8) x <module> in <string x, y = 2, 3; x **= y>:1
           DEBUG:xpython.vm:  frame.stack: []
           DEBUG:xpython.vm:  blocks     : []
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @ 16: LOAD_CONST None <module> in <string x, y = 2, 3; x **= y>:1
           DEBUG:xpython.vm:  frame.stack: [None]
           DEBUG:xpython.vm:  blocks     : []
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @ 18: RETURN_VALUE (None)  <module> in <string x, y = 2, 3; x **= y>:1
        
        
        Want to see this colorized in a terminal? Use this via ``trepan-xpy -x``:
        |trepan-xpy-example|
        
        Suppose you have Python 2.4 bytecode (or some other bytecode) for
        this, but you are running Python 3.7?
        
        ::
        
           $ xpython -v test/examples/assign-2.4.pyc
           INFO:xpython.vm:L. 1   @  0: LOAD_CONST (2, 3)
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @  3: UNPACK_SEQUENCE 2
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @  6: STORE_NAME (2) x
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @  9: STORE_NAME (3) y
           INFO:xpython.vm:L. 2   @ 12: LOAD_NAME x
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @ 15: LOAD_NAME y
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @ 18: INPLACE_POWER (2, 3)
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @ 19: STORE_NAME (8) x
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @ 22: LOAD_CONST None
           INFO:xpython.vm:       @ 25: RETURN_VALUE (None)
        
        Not much has changed here, other then the fact that that in after 3.6 instructions are two bytes instead of 1- or 3-byte instructions.
        
        The above examples show straight-line code, so you see all of the instructions. But don't confuse this with a disassembler like `pydisasm` from `xdis`.
        The below example, with conditional branching example makes this more clear:
        ::
        
            $ xpython -vc "x = 6 if __name__ != '__main__' else 10"
            INFO:xpython.vm:L. 1   @  0: LOAD_NAME __name__
            INFO:xpython.vm:       @  2: LOAD_CONST __main__
            INFO:xpython.vm:       @  4: COMPARE_OP ('__main__', '__main__') !=
            INFO:xpython.vm:       @  6: POP_JUMP_IF_FALSE 12
                                                           ^^ Note jump below
            INFO:xpython.vm:       @ 12: LOAD_CONST 10
            INFO:xpython.vm:       @ 14: STORE_NAME (10) x
            INFO:xpython.vm:       @ 16: LOAD_CONST None
            INFO:xpython.vm:       @ 18: RETURN_VALUE (None)
        
        Want even more status and control? See `trepan-xpy <https://github.com/rocky/trepan-xpy>`_.
        
        Status:
        +++++++
        
        Currently bytecode from Python versions 3.10 to 3.2, and 2.7 to 2.4 are
        supported. The most recent versions of Python don't have all opcodes
        implemented. This is only one of many interests I have, so support may
        be shoddy. I use funding to help me direct where my attention goes in
        fixing problems, which are vast in this project.
        
        
        *Byterun*, from which this was based on, is awesome. But it cheats in
        subtle ways.
        
        Want to write a very small interpreter using CPython?
        
        ::
        
           # get code somehow
           exec(code)
        
        This cheats in kind of a gross way, but this the kind of cheating goes
        on in *Byterun* in a more subtle way. As in the example above which
        relies on built-in function ``exec`` to do all of the work, *Byterun*
        relies on various similar sorts of built-in functions to support
        opcode interpretation. In fact, if the code you were *interpreting*
        was the above, *Byterun* would use its built-in function for running
        code inside the `exec` function call, so all of the bytecode that gets
        run inside code inside *code* would not seen for interpretation.
        
        Also, built-in functions like `exec`, and other built-in modules have
        an effect in the interpreter namespace.  So the two namespaces then
        get intermingled.
        
        One example of this that has been noted is for ``import``. See
        https://github.com/nedbat/byterun/issues/26.  But there are others
        cases as well.  While we haven't addressed the ``import`` issue
        mentioned in issue 26, we have addressed similar kinds of issues like
        this.
        
        Some built-in functions and the ``inpsect`` module require built-in
        types like cell, traceback, or frame objects, and they can't use the
        corresponding interpreter classes. Here is an example of this in
        *Byterun*: class ``__init__`` functions don't get traced into, because
        the built-in function ``__build_class__`` is relied on. And
        ``__build_class__`` needs a native function, not an
        interpreter-traceable function. See
        https://github.com/nedbat/byterun/pull/20.
        
        Also *Byterun* is loose in accepting bytecode opcodes that is invalid
        for particular Python but may be valid for another. I suppose this is
        okay since you don't expect invalid opcodes appearing in valid
        bytecode. It can however accidentally or erronously appear code that
        has been obtained via some sort of extraction process, when the
        extraction process isn't accruate.
        
        In contrast to *Byterun*, *x-python* is more stringent what opcodes it
        accepts.
        
        Byterun needs the kind of overhaul we have here to be able to scale to
        support bytecode for more Pythons, and to be able to run bytecode
        across different versions of Python. Specifically, you can't rely on
        Python's `dis <https://docs.python.org/3/library/dis.html>`_ module if
        you expect to run a bytecode other than the bytecode that the
        interpreter is running, or run newer "wordcode" bytecode on a
        "byte"-oriented byteocde, or vice versa.
        
        In contrast, *x-python* there is a clear distinction between the
        version being interpreted and the version of Python that is
        running. There is tighter control of opcodes and an opcode's
        implementation is kept for each Python version. So we'll warn early
        when something is invalid. You can run bytecode back to Python 2.4
        using Python 3.10 (largely), which is amazing give that 3.10's native
        byte code is 2 bytes per instruction while 2.4's is 1 or 3 bytes per
        instruction.
        
        The "largely" part is, as mentioned above, because the interpreter has
        always made use of Python builtins and libraries, and for the most
        part these haven't changed very much. Often, since many of the
        underlying builtins are the same, the interpreter can (and does) make
        use interpreter internals. For example, built-in functions like
        ``range()`` are supported this way.
        
        So interpreting bytecode from a newer Python release than the release
        the Python interpreter is using, is often doable too. Even though
        Python 2.7 doesn't support keyword-only arguments or format strings,
        it can still interpret bytecode created from using these constructs.
        
        That's possible here because these specific features are more
        syntactic sugar rather than extensions to the runtime. For example,
        format strings basically map down to using the ``format()`` function
        which is available on 2.7.
        
        But new features like asynchronous I/O and concurrency primitives are not
        in the older versions. So those need to be simulated, and that too is a
        possibility if there is interest or support.
        
        You can run many of the tests that Python uses to test itself, and I
        do! And most of those work. Right now this program works best on Python up to
        3.4 when life in Python was much simpler. It runs over 300 in Python's
        test suite for itself without problems. For Python 3.6 the number
        drops down to about 237; Python 3.9 is worse still.
        
        
        History
        +++++++
        
        This is a fork of *Byterun.* which is a pure-Python implementation of
        a Python bytecode execution virtual machine.  Ned Batchelder started
        it (based on work from Paul Swartz) to get a better understanding of
        bytecodes so he could fix branch coverage bugs in coverage.py.
        
        .. |CircleCI| image:: https://circleci.com/gh/rocky/x-python.svg?style=svg
            :target: https://circleci.com/gh/rocky/x-python
        .. |TravisCI| image:: https://travis-ci.org/rocky/x-python.svg?branch=master
        		 :target: https://travis-ci.org/rocky/x-python
        
        .. |trepan-xpy-example| image:: https://github.com/rocky/x-python/blob/master/screenshots/trepan-xpy-assign.gif
        .. |Latest Version| image:: https://badge.fury.io/py/x-python.svg
        		 :target: https://badge.fury.io/py/x-python
        .. |PyPI Installs| image:: https://pepy.tech/badge/x-python/month
        .. |Supported Python Versions| image:: https://img.shields.io/pypi/pyversions/x-python.svg
        
        
Platform: UNKNOWN
Classifier: Operating System :: OS Independent
Classifier: Programming Language :: Python :: 2.7
Classifier: Programming Language :: Python :: 3.2
Classifier: Programming Language :: Python :: 3.3
Classifier: Programming Language :: Python :: 3.4
Classifier: Programming Language :: Python :: 3.5
Classifier: Programming Language :: Python :: 3.6
Classifier: Programming Language :: Python :: 3.7
Classifier: Programming Language :: Python :: 3.8
Classifier: Programming Language :: Python :: 3.9
Description-Content-Type: text/x-rst
