Lisa Roach <[email protected]> added the comment:
Yes, sorry I wasn't clear, I was thinking about the functions and testing
without your PR. I think removing the __code__ object (or working around it) is
the correct way to go, but just removing it wouldn't solve this particular
problem.
"If I understand the awaitable examples correctly, mocking the obj which is an
Awaitable should be returning an AsyncMock. But obj doesn't contain __code__
and hence check for inspect.isawaitable is never done causing
_is_async_obj(obj) to return False and subsequently it's patched with
MagicMock."
Exactly! This is why I think technically removing the __code__ check is
correct. Probably removing the __code__ attribute for any AsyncMock that is
mocking an async object and not an async function is best, but I don't know how
I would do that.
I may also be misunderstanding some asyncio concepts, that is just what I
observed :)
What if instead of checking for the __code__ object at all we check if there it
is a Mock object (excluding AsyncMock):
def _is_async_obj(obj):
sync_mocks = [MagicMock, Mock, PropertyMock, NonCallableMock,
NonCallableMagicMock]
if (any(isinstance(obj, sync_mock) for sync_mock in sync_mocks)
and not isinstance(obj, AsyncMock)):
return False
return asyncio.iscoroutinefunction(obj) or inspect.isawaitable(obj)
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <[email protected]>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue37251>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
