function definitions' line and column reported are wrong if the function has a decorator

[gforcada]

See #22 (comment) for the details.

So far it seems that the ast module does not provide that information.

An upstream bug to CPython has been created for that: https://bugs.python.org/issue33211

/cc @dhood

[dhood]

following on from #22 (comment):

What we can do meanwhile would be to create a new error message (say A003) explaining the situation, only if the function definition has a decorator. Would that be an optimal solution? I would rather not like to parse the file manually and search for the correct spot going line by line just for this corner case... I'm open to pull requests that do that though

personally given how verbose the error message was I didn't find it too difficult to identify the source of the problem even with the decorator being mistakenly reported.
we're tossing up whether or not to noqa this error, and when we do so we usually prefer to noqa a specific error code.
If I understand your suggestion correctly a user would have to noqa different error codes if they add/remove a decorator, which perhaps is enough reason (combined with the already descriptive error message) to not bother splitting it out

[gforcada]

@dhood thanks for chimming in, given what I see on the upstream report in cpython I would close, at least by now, as a WONTFIX.