[issue1692335] Fix exception pickling: Move initial args assignment to BaseException.__new__
Georg Brandl added the comment: Richard, can the issue be closed? -- priority: release blocker - critical ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue1692335 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15295] Import machinery documentation
Nick Coghlan added the comment: General comment: runpy, pkgutil, et al should all get See Also links at the top pointing to the new import system section. Import system intro: As noted above, I suggest changing the name :) Opening section should refer to importlib.import_module(). Any mentions of __import__ should point out that its API is designed for the convenience of the interpreter, and thus it's a pain to use directly. However, we should also document explicitly that, unlike the import statement and calling __import__ directly, importlib.import_module will ignore any module level replacements of __import__. Replacing builtins.__import__ won't reliably override the entire import system (due to module level __import__ definitions, most notably importlib.__import__) and other tools that work with the process global import state directly (e.g. pkgutil, runpy). 5.1 Packages: Don't tease readers, just tell them: the defining characteristic of a package is that it is a module object with a __path__ attribute. Since we have the privilege of defining *the* standard terminology for old-style packages, I suggest we use the term initialised packages (since having an __init__.py is what makes them special). We should also note explicitly that an initialised package can also behave as a namespace package, by setting __path__ appropriately in __init__.py Also, I suggest adding a 5.1.3 Package Example subheading - currently you define an initialised package under the namespace package heading Finally, I think this section needs to explicitly define the terms *import path* and *path entry*. The meta path docs later refer to find_module() accepting a module name and path, and the reader could be forgiven for thinking that meant a filesystem path, when it is actually an import path (which is a sequence of path entries, which may themselves by filesystem paths). 5.2.2 Finders and loaders: The term sys path finder is incorrect as registered path hooks are invoked for both sys.path entries *and* package __path__ entries. I suggest path entry finder. (I agree a longer name is needed to better distinguish them from metapath finders) 5.2.3 Import hooks: While it does get cleared up in 5.2.4, this section could be clearer that the hooks *cannot* override the initial check of the module cache. 5.3.4 Metapath: See above comment about clarifying that an import path is passed to find_module() rather than a filesystem path. The description of the path importer is incorrect. It only knows how to scan an import path and interrogate the path hooks. It's the individual path entry finders that know how to do things like load modules from the filesystem or zip files. 5.2.5 Meta path loaders I don't like the title here. There's no such thing as a meta path loader. there are only module loaders. Once they're created, it doesn't matter how you found them. Clarify that the loader only has to remove the modules it inserted itself. Other modules that were loaded *successfully* as a side effect of the code execution will remain in the cache. 5.3 The Path Importer As noted above, the path importer is *NOT* restricted to filesystem imports. All it cares about is arbitrary text sequences and path hooks. With the right path hook, you could use URLs or database connection strings as path entries. 5.5 References I'd also point to PEP 328 (absolute imports by default and explicit relative import syntax) and PEP 338 (using the import system to find __main__) -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15295 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15295] Import machinery documentation
Nick Coghlan added the comment: Great start here Barry, I'll switch my checkout over to read/write access and start contributing fixes. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15295 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15295] Import machinery documentation
Nick Coghlan added the comment: Pushed the import machinery - import system change (which hopefully won't break Barry's world) Also merged in a more recent version of trunk. This probably screwed up the default branch in this clone, but the clone should be done after these docs updates. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15295 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15467] Updating __sizeof__ tests
Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: Patches updated. Simplified struct __sizeof__ testing for 2.7 and 3.2 and fixed (using 'n' for Py_ssize_t) for 3.3. -- nosy: +meador.inge Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26561/sizeof_tests-3.3_2.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15467 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15467] Updating __sizeof__ tests
Changes by Serhiy Storchaka storch...@gmail.com: Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26562/sizeof_tests-3.2_2.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15467 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15467] Updating __sizeof__ tests
Changes by Serhiy Storchaka storch...@gmail.com: Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26563/sizeof_tests-2.7_2.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15467 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15467] Updating __sizeof__ tests
Changes by Serhiy Storchaka storch...@gmail.com: Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file26541/sizeof_tests-3.3.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15467 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15467] Updating __sizeof__ tests
Changes by Serhiy Storchaka storch...@gmail.com: Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file26542/sizeof_tests-3.2.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15467 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15467] Updating __sizeof__ tests
Changes by Serhiy Storchaka storch...@gmail.com: Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file26543/sizeof_tests-2.7.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15467 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue14803] Add feature to allow code execution prior to __main__ invocation
Nick Coghlan added the comment: I've switched back to being -1 on the PYTHONRUNFIRST idea. There are no ACLs for environment variables, so the security implications scare me too much for me to support the feature. The simple -C option doesn't have that problem, though, and could be used as infrastructure in a process infrastructure framework to provide enhanced configuration of Python subprocesses. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue14803 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15425] Another strange Tracebacks with importlib
Changes by Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com: -- nosy: +ncoghlan ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15425 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15425] Another strange Tracebacks with importlib
Nick Coghlan added the comment: Added patch with test cases for the situations Amaury picked up, as well another I noticed (when the from clause refers to a module that fails) -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26564/issue15425_test_cases.diff ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15425 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15425] Another strange Tracebacks with importlib
Nick Coghlan added the comment: I actually did start refactoring a lot of this when I was working on the pkgutil changes, but stopped because that patch was already hairy enough. Maybe I should have kept going... -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15425 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15425] Another strange Tracebacks with importlib
Nick Coghlan added the comment: I think tuning the what frames to hide heuristic is a better bet - I remember know that the real reason I stopped messing with which exceptions were thrown was that I ended up confusing pkgutil. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15425 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15425] Another strange Tracebacks with importlib
Nick Coghlan added the comment: Fixed test case patch - previous one included a comment from when my test was buggy. -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26565/issue15425_test_cases.diff ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15425 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15425] Another strange Tracebacks with importlib
Changes by Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com: Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file26564/issue15425_test_cases.diff ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15425 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15425] Another strange Tracebacks with importlib
Amaury Forgeot d'Arc added the comment: I like the concept of exit points that Antoine introduced with a special method name. Maybe we coule generalize this and have a execute_and_hide_frames(func, *args, **kwargs) that is recognized by the caller in import.c. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15425 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue12834] memorview.to_bytes() and PyBuffer_ToContiguous() incorrect for non-contiguous arrays
Stefan Krah added the comment: Christian's posts and my initial report were about memoryview.tobytes(). It's good that you changed the title: memoryview.tobytes() is more meaningful than the slightly obscure PyBuffer_ToContiguous(). BTW, I'm sure that PyBuffer_FromContiguous() and PyObject_CopyData() have the same problem, but they aren't used in the Python source tree and they are undocumented. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue12834 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15477] test_cmath failures on OS X 10.8
Mark Dickinson added the comment: These types of run-time tests based on configure-time tests are problematic for binary installations of Python, like the OS X installers. Understood. I'm wondering how to fix this for Python, given that we're unlikely to see an OS-level fix for a while. There's an easy workaround, namely to add an if (x == 0.0) return x; before any use of the system log1p; the issue is how and when to apply this workaround. One option is always to apply the workaround, but this feels to me as though it's unnecessarily penalising those OSs that get it right; maybe just always apply the workaround on OS X? -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15477 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15425] Another strange Tracebacks with importlib
Nick Coghlan added the comment: OK, to investigate the failures a bit further, I turned off the traceback suppression altogether by sticking an immediate return at the start of remove_importlib_frames. For the three failing tests, this is what I got when adding a traceback.print_tb call: test_broken_from (test.test_import.ImportTracebackTests) ... File /home/ncoghlan/devel/py3k/Lib/test/test_import.py, line 890, in test_broken_from from _parent_foo import bar File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 1572, in _handle_fromlist File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 1524, in _find_and_load File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 1491, in _find_and_load_unlocked File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 571, in _check_name_wrapper File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 1002, in load_module File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 983, in load_module File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 547, in module_for_loader_wrapper File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 853, in _load_module File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 860, in _exec_module File ./_parent_foo/bar.py, line 1, in module 1/0 FAIL test_broken_parent (test.test_import.ImportTracebackTests) ... File /home/ncoghlan/devel/py3k/Lib/test/test_import.py, line 902, in test_broken_parent import _parent_foo.bar File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 1524, in _find_and_load File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 1475, in _find_and_load_unlocked File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 1524, in _find_and_load File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 1491, in _find_and_load_unlocked File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 571, in _check_name_wrapper File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 1002, in load_module File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 983, in load_module File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 547, in module_for_loader_wrapper File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 853, in _load_module File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 860, in _exec_module File ./_parent_foo/__init__.py, line 1, in module 1/0 FAIL test_syntax_error (test.test_import.ImportTracebackTests) ... File /home/ncoghlan/devel/py3k/Lib/test/test_import.py, line 851, in test_syntax_error import foo File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 1524, in _find_and_load File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 1491, in _find_and_load_unlocked File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 571, in _check_name_wrapper File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 1002, in load_module File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 983, in load_module File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 547, in module_for_loader_wrapper File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 838, in _load_module File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 960, in get_code FAIL And here's what I get with my patched version enabled (which also ignores chunks ending with get_code when the failure is a syntax error): test_broken_from (test.test_import.ImportTracebackTests) ... File /home/ncoghlan/devel/py3k/Lib/test/test_import.py, line 890, in test_broken_from from _parent_foo import bar File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 1572, in _handle_fromlist File ./_parent_foo/bar.py, line 1, in module 1/0 FAIL test_broken_parent (test.test_import.ImportTracebackTests) ... File /home/ncoghlan/devel/py3k/Lib/test/test_import.py, line 902, in test_broken_parent import _parent_foo.bar File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 1524, in _find_and_load File frozen importlib._bootstrap, line 1475, in _find_and_load_unlocked File ./_parent_foo/__init__.py, line 1, in module 1/0 FAIL test_syntax_error (test.test_import.ImportTracebackTests) ... File /home/ncoghlan/devel/py3k/Lib/test/test_import.py, line 851, in test_syntax_error import foo FAIL -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15425 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15425] Another strange Tracebacks with importlib
Nick Coghlan added the comment: I realised that it is my test that was wrong in the syntax error case. Attached patch includes the test cases, and the fix for that case. The weird thing that still requires an explanation is why the chunks in the first two cases are only being partially stripped. Those blocks end with _exec_module, yet a couple of frames are being left in the traceback. Current patch includes my debugging output from those tests. -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26566/issue15425_handle_syntax_error.diff ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15425 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15268] curses configure checks fail if only /usr/include/ncursesw/curses.h is installed
Roumen Petrov added the comment: Matthias, do not use hack if cross-build -- nosy: +rpetrov Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26567/4-CROSS-avoid-ncursesw-include-path-hack.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15268 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15483] CROSS: initialise include and library paths in setup.py
New submission from Roumen Petrov: In setup.py inc_dirs and lib_dirs are not initialized in cross-build case. -- files: 1-CROSS-initialise-include-and-library-paths.patch keywords: patch messages: 166733 nosy: rpetrov priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: CROSS: initialise include and library paths in setup.py Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26568/1-CROSS-initialise-include-and-library-paths.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15483 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15484] CROSS: use _PYTHON_PROJECT_BASE in distutils sysconfig
New submission from Roumen Petrov: Same as sysconfig but now in distutils _PYTHON_PROJECT_BASE has to be used in cross-build environment. -- components: Build files: 2-CROSS-use-_PYTHON_PROJECT_BASE-in-distutils-sysconfig.patch keywords: patch messages: 166734 nosy: rpetrov priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: CROSS: use _PYTHON_PROJECT_BASE in distutils sysconfig versions: Python 3.3 Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26569/2-CROSS-use-_PYTHON_PROJECT_BASE-in-distutils-sysconfig.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15484 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15425] Another strange Tracebacks with importlib
Nick Coghlan added the comment: Ah, it turns out the three problem children are those which accept an import_ callback, which is set to builtins.__import__ when accessed via the import statement. This means we end up making a *recursive* call to PyImport_ImportModuleLevelObject, which calls remove_importlib_frames. The inner section of the trace gets stripped away, thus the _exec_module frame is already gone by the time the outer frames get added to the traceback. For the moment, I'm just going to adopt the blunt instrument approach and special case those three functions (including them in the always strip category). If anyone else comes up with a more elegant mechanism to deal with the recursion, we can switch to it later. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15425 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15484] CROSS: use _PYTHON_PROJECT_BASE in distutils sysconfig
Roumen Petrov added the comment: Also _PYTHON_PROJECT_BASE should be initialized to build directory by configure - low priority as other issue prevent python to be build and tested smoothly outside source tree. -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26570/2-CROSS-set-_PYTHON_PROJECT_BASE-to-current-build-dir.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15484 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15485] CROSS: append gcc library search paths
New submission from Roumen Petrov: Currently if cross-build add_gcc_paths use append_dir_to_list but later prepend library paths. As result gcc is multilib 64-bit libraries will be found first before 32-bit one. -- components: Cross-Build files: 3-CROSS-append-gcc-library-search-paths.patch keywords: patch messages: 166737 nosy: rpetrov priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: CROSS: append gcc library search paths versions: Python 3.3 Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26571/3-CROSS-append-gcc-library-search-paths.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15485 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15482] __import__() change between 3.2 and 3.3
Martin v. Löwis added the comment: So should 3.2 be changed to adjust the default value to match the documentation? -- nosy: +loewis ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15482 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue12834] memoryview.to_bytes() and PyBuffer_ToContiguous() incorrect for non-contiguous arrays
Changes by Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com: -- title: memorview.to_bytes() and PyBuffer_ToContiguous() incorrect for non-contiguous arrays - memoryview.to_bytes() and PyBuffer_ToContiguous() incorrect for non-contiguous arrays ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue12834 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15484] CROSS: use _PYTHON_PROJECT_BASE in distutils sysconfig
Changes by Roumen Petrov bugtr...@roumenpetrov.info: -- components: +Cross-Build -Build type: - compile error ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15484 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15483] CROSS: initialise include and library paths in setup.py
Changes by Roumen Petrov bugtr...@roumenpetrov.info: -- components: +Cross-Build versions: +Python 3.3 ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15483 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15425] Another strange Tracebacks with importlib
Nick Coghlan added the comment: I'll at least introduce a _recursive_import exit point to simplify handling of those three cases. For those, if there isn't another importlib frame on the stack below them, odds are pretty good that it has been stripped already. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15425 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue3754] cross-compilation support for python build
Roumen Petrov added the comment: I hope that following separate issues will address remaining part of this patch: required: - 15483: initialise include and library paths in setup.py - 15484: use _PYTHON_PROJECT_BASE in distutils sysconfig - TODO: typo in in configure.in - use ac_cv_pthread instead ac_cv_thread - 15268: skip curses configure checks fail if only /usr/include/ncursesw/curses.h is installed optional: - 15298: _sysconfigdata is generated in srcdir, not builddir - 14598: _cursesmodule.c fails with ncurses-5.9 on Linux reported first as 14438 - _cursesmodule build fails on cygwin and all other that allow python to be build smoothly outside source directory -- components: +Cross-Build -Build, Distutils2 ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue3754 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue3871] cross and native build of python for mingw32 with packaging
Roumen Petrov added the comment: May be patch 20120729 cannot be applied as my source tree contain a number of patches related to cross build - see msg166740 from issue 3754 . -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26572/python-py3k-20120729-MINGW.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue3871 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15425] Another strange Tracebacks with importlib
Nick Coghlan added the comment: I think the implementation I just checked in is close to being as simple as we can get: Blocks ending in _exec_module and _recursive_import are trimmed unconditionally For SyntaxError, it also trims blocks ending in get_code For ImportError, it trims everything involving importlib Because the latter two are conditional on the kind of exception thrown, it's only the first two that could be unified and I think keeping the two distinct checks is actually clearer in that case. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15425 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15425] Another strange Tracebacks with importlib
Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset 75a30a478dc7 by Nick Coghlan in branch 'default': Close #15425: Eliminate more importlib related traceback noise http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/75a30a478dc7 -- nosy: +python-dev resolution: - fixed stage: - committed/rejected status: open - closed ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15425 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15425] Another strange Tracebacks with importlib
Nick Coghlan added the comment: On second thought, I realised having a general purpose hide this hook means that any future unconditional cases can easily be hidden just by changing from the normal call to a stripped call. I'll implement that now. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15425 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15486] Standardise the mechanisms for stripping importlib frames
New submission from Nick Coghlan: Thanks to issue #15425, the number of special cases in the importlib frame stripping is growing. This patch tweaks the frame stripping mechanism to make it easy to selectively strip frames in importlib._bootstrap by creating a _call_with_frames_removed helper function. The rules in remove_importlib_frames then change to remove any sequence of importlib frames which ends with that helper and all importlib frames in the ImportError case. -- messages: 166745 nosy: ncoghlan priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: Standardise the mechanisms for stripping importlib frames ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15486 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15425] Another strange Tracebacks with importlib
Nick Coghlan added the comment: Seeing as the blocker is dealt with for beta2, see #15486 for the proposed refactoring. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15425 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue14803] Add feature to allow code execution prior to __main__ invocation
Antoine Pitrou added the comment: I've switched back to being -1 on the PYTHONRUNFIRST idea. There are no ACLs for environment variables, so the security implications scare me too much for me to support the feature. I'm quite sure PYTHONHOME and PYTHONPATH already allow you to mess quite freely. That's why we have the -E flag. I'm -0.5 myself, though, for the reason that it complicates the startup process a little bit more, without looking very compelling. It smells disturbingly like LD_PRELOAD to me. The simple -C option doesn't have that problem, though, and could be used as infrastructure in a process infrastructure framework to provide enhanced configuration of Python subprocesses. What do you mean exactly? -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue14803 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15486] Standardised mechanism for stripping importlib frames from tracebacks
Nick Coghlan added the comment: In trying to find a new case that wasn't already covered by the test suite, I found an error which I'm not even sure should be an error. Doesn't 3.2 suppress failures that occur when attempting to implicitly cache the .pyc? Anyway, given the rest of the patch, trimming this traceback will be easy if we decide that's the right thing to do. -- components: +Interpreter Core, Library (Lib) keywords: +patch nosy: +amaury.forgeotdarc, brett.cannon, eric.snow, georg.brandl priority: normal - release blocker stage: - patch review title: Standardise the mechanisms for stripping importlib frames - Standardised mechanism for stripping importlib frames from tracebacks type: - behavior versions: +Python 3.3 Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26573/issue15486_simplify_importlib_frame_removal.diff ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15486 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15482] __import__() change between 3.2 and 3.3
Changes by Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis arfrever@gmail.com: -- nosy: +Arfrever ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15482 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15425] Another strange Tracebacks with importlib
Changes by Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis arfrever@gmail.com: -- nosy: +Arfrever ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15425 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15486] Standardised mechanism for stripping importlib frames from tracebacks
Changes by Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis arfrever@gmail.com: -- nosy: +Arfrever ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15486 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15484] CROSS: use _PYTHON_PROJECT_BASE in distutils sysconfig
Changes by Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis arfrever@gmail.com: -- nosy: +Arfrever ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15484 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15295] Import machinery documentation
Nick Coghlan added the comment: Updated the statement docs to accurately describe the from X import Y case. I also noted that unlike the statement form, importlib.import_module ignores module level __import__ overrides. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15295 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue1692335] Fix exception pickling: Move initial args assignment to BaseException.__new__
Richard Oudkerk added the comment: Richard, can the issue be closed? I guess so (although the change could arguably be back ported). Pickling of Exception classes is still somewhat dodgy because an example like class Error(Exception): def __init__(self, x): Exception.__init__(self) self.x = x is still not picklable. Any further improvements can be discussed in a separate issue, so I will close. -- resolution: - fixed status: open - closed ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue1692335 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue12288] Python 2.7.1 tkSimpleDialog initialvalue
Andrew Svetlov added the comment: Add patch for py3k -- assignee: - asvetlov keywords: +patch nosy: +asvetlov versions: +Python 3.2, Python 3.3 Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26574/issue12288.diff ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue12288 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue6056] socket.setdefaulttimeout affecting multiprocessing Manager
Changes by Richard Oudkerk shibt...@gmail.com: -- resolution: - fixed stage: needs patch - committed/rejected status: open - closed type: crash - behavior ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue6056 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue12288] tkinter SimpleDialog initialvalue
Changes by Andrew Svetlov andrew.svet...@gmail.com: -- title: Python 2.7.1 tkSimpleDialog initialvalue - tkinter SimpleDialog initialvalue ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue12288 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue14803] Add feature to allow code execution prior to __main__ invocation
Nick Coghlan added the comment: Nothing too complicated - just noting that a test suite like ours that launches Python subprocesses to test process global state handling could fairly easily arrange to pass appropriate -C options to trigger things like recording coverage data or profiling options. I'll also note that if you put a preinit.py on sys.path (e.g. in the current directory if using -m for invocation), you could easily do -C 'import preinit' to do arbitrarily complex custom setups, including preconfiguring your test framework. A lot of my thoughts on this come out of looking into migrating the various stdlib modules like trace, pdb and profile over to supporting everything that runpy (and hence the main executable) supports, and a lot of the complexity lies in the mechanics of how to daisy chain the two __main__ modules together. Running a bit of extra code in __main__ as supplied on the command line before kicking off the full import process helps avoid a lot of pain. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue14803 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15364] sysconfig confused by relative paths
Richard Oudkerk added the comment: One example is 'srcdir': this value is only useful in the build tree and there currently is no clean way to signal that you are retrieving a value that is not useful. In the particular case of 'srcdir', sysconfig.is_python_build() tells you whether the value is useful. Concerns about sysconfig often returning values which are meaningless for the current configuration can be discussed in another issue. Unless there are objections I will close. -- resolution: - fixed stage: commit review - committed/rejected ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15364 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue12834] memoryview.to_bytes() and PyBuffer_ToContiguous() incorrect for non-contiguous arrays
Christian Heimes added the comment: Thanks Stefan and Nick! I tried to find the off-by-one bug myself but gave up quickly. Stefan's rewrite is a better approach. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue12834 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue14803] Add feature to allow code execution prior to __main__ invocation
Ned Batchelder added the comment: I'm -0.5 myself, though, for the reason that it complicates the startup process a little bit more, without looking very compelling. It smells disturbingly like LD_PRELOAD to me. Antoine, do you have a suggestion for how to solve the coverage.py problem? To re-iterate: imagine you have a large test suite, and it spawns python processes during the tests. Mercurial, for example, is like this. You want to measure the coverage of your test suite. This means not do you have to invoke the main suite with python coverage.py run tests.py instead of python tests.py, but all the subprocess invocations need to invoke coverage.py as well. We are looking for ways to make this as transparent as possible to the tests themselves, just as coverage measurement is now for test suites that don't spawn python subprocesses. http://nedbatchelder.com/code/coverage/subprocess.html describes the two current hacks people can use to invoke coverage on subprocesses. I was hoping for a cleaner more natural solution. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue14803 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15487] Correct __sizeof__ support for buffered I/O
New submission from Serhiy Storchaka: Here is a patch that implements correct __sizeof__ for C implementation of buffered I/O files: io.BufferedReader, io.BufferedWriter and io.BufferedRandom. -- components: IO, Library (Lib) messages: 166756 nosy: benjamin.peterson, hynek, pitrou, storchaka, stutzbach priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: Correct __sizeof__ support for buffered I/O type: behavior versions: Python 2.7, Python 3.2, Python 3.3 ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15487 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15425] Another strange Tracebacks with importlib
Chris Jerdonek added the comment: The unit tests added here are another candidate for the refactoring in issue 15403 (Refactor package creation support code into a common location). I'll note this in that issue. -- nosy: +cjerdonek ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15425 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15487] Correct __sizeof__ support for buffered I/O
Hynek Schlawack added the comment: There is no patch. -- stage: - needs patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15487 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15403] Refactor package creation support code into a common location
Chris Jerdonek added the comment: Lib/test/test_import.py also contains test code that would benefit from this (see for example issue 15425). (Though not all files need to be refactored in a single issue.) -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15403 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15486] Standardised mechanism for stripping importlib frames from tracebacks
Chris Jerdonek added the comment: The test cases uploaded to issue 7559 (TestLoader.loadTestsFromName swallows import errors) a while back contain a number of distinct cases (four, I think) in which an import error can be raised. IIRC, these include a couple recursive scenarios (cyclical import from within __init__.py, etc). Those test cases were designed specifically to cover different scenarios in which unittest's loader was swallowing import errors. Might be worth taking a look. -- nosy: +cjerdonek ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15486 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue14803] Add feature to allow code execution prior to __main__ invocation
Changes by Chris Jerdonek chris.jerdo...@gmail.com: -- nosy: +cjerdonek ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue14803 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15487] Correct __sizeof__ support for buffered I/O
Changes by Serhiy Storchaka storch...@gmail.com: -- keywords: +patch Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26575/bufferedio_sizeof.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15487 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15451] PATH is not honored in subprocess.Popen in win32
Richard Oudkerk added the comment: But I observe that the same script(with proper modification of file names) works very well under Linux. After I dive into the source code, I found Python use execvpe to invoke the child process which _will_ use the PATH variable to search the executable. The posix execvpe function does not use PATH from the passed environment, but (surprisingly to me) os.execvpe does. subprocess in Python 3 no longer uses os.execvpe, but still goes out of its way to use envp['PATH'] on posix systems when searching for the executable. So I think you have a legitimate complaint of inconsistency. However, I don't think your suggested fix is a good idea since it (temporarily) changes the environment of the current process which might be problematic in a threaded program. I am sure that Python 2.7 will not be patched to address this, but you might want to make a feature request for Python 3.4. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15451 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue14803] Add feature to allow code execution prior to __main__ invocation
Chris Jerdonek added the comment: Ned, two questions: in the scenario you just described, is it a requirement that your test suite's code need not be modified (even minimally) to support coverage of subprocesses? And can the solution assume that the test suite is spawning the Python processes in certain standard ways, or must it address all possible ways (even convoluted ones)? If the former, what are the standard ways? I am referring to things like the path to the Python interpreter invoked and how that is obtained, whether the subprocess module is always used, etc. These questions are meant to help pin down the scope of what needs to be satisfied. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue14803 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue14803] Add feature to allow code execution prior to __main__ invocation
Antoine Pitrou added the comment: I'm -0.5 myself, though, for the reason that it complicates the startup process a little bit more, without looking very compelling. It smells disturbingly like LD_PRELOAD to me. Antoine, do you have a suggestion for how to solve the coverage.py problem? To re-iterate: imagine you have a large test suite, and it spawns python processes during the tests. Mercurial, for example, is like this. You want to measure the coverage of your test suite. This means not do you have to invoke the main suite with python coverage.py run tests.py instead of python tests.py, but all the subprocess invocations need to invoke coverage.py as well. Ok, sorry then, I retract what I said. I agree the use case is legitimate. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue14803 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue12834] memoryview.to_bytes() and PyBuffer_ToContiguous() incorrect for non-contiguous arrays
Stefan Krah added the comment: Nick, are you talking about a complete backport or just about pulling in all functions needed by PyBuffer_ToContiguous()? -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue12834 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue14803] Add feature to allow code execution prior to __main__ invocation
Ned Batchelder added the comment: Chris: The real problem is that it isn't the test suite that spawns the processes, the tests invoke product code, and the product code spawns Python. So modifying the Python-spawning really means modifying the product code to do something different under coverage, which most developers (rightfully) won't want to do. My preference is not to assume a particular style of spawning subprocesses, since coverage.py tried quite hard to be applicable to any Python project. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue14803 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15467] Updating __sizeof__ tests
Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset efade142ef01 by Martin v. Löwis in branch '3.2': Issue #15467: Move helpers for __sizeof__ tests into test_support. http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/efade142ef01 New changeset d43ff8eb4cb3 by Martin v. Löwis in branch 'default': Issue #15467: Merge 3.2 http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/d43ff8eb4cb3 -- nosy: +python-dev ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15467 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15467] Updating __sizeof__ tests
Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset fa95b04e67fd by Martin v. Löwis in branch '2.7': Issue #15467: Move helpers for __sizeof__ tests into test_support. http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/fa95b04e67fd -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15467 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15487] Correct __sizeof__ support for buffered I/O
Antoine Pitrou added the comment: Instead of putting this in MiscIOTest, you could use the relevant class-specific test cases. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15487 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15467] Updating __sizeof__ tests
Martin v. Löwis added the comment: I wasn't aware that test_support isn't public API. The patches are fine then; committed. -- resolution: - fixed status: open - closed ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15467 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15486] Standardised mechanism for stripping importlib frames from tracebacks
Antoine Pitrou added the comment: This is an elegant solution, +1 from me. -- nosy: +pitrou ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15486 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15403] Refactor package creation support code into a common location
Antoine Pitrou added the comment: Please let's not have something called test.supportlib in addition to test.support. If test.support grows too large we can turn it into a package. -- nosy: +pitrou ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15403 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue14803] Add feature to allow code execution prior to __main__ invocation
Chris Jerdonek added the comment: I understand that. Sorry, I meant to say code under test. If you make no assumptions about spawning subprocesses, does this mean, for example, that the solution must satisfy the case of subprocesses invoking a different version of Python, or invoking the same version of Python in a different virtual environment? -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue14803 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15403] Refactor package creation support code into a common location
Chris Jerdonek added the comment: I feel like it is already too large (it is over 1750 lines), and I did not want to create a third sibling test support module (there is also test/script_helper.py that overlaps with test.support). Do you think that the community would be open to refactoring test.support into a package for Python 3.3? This was meant to assist in increasing test coverage for Python 3.3 bugs. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15403 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15403] Refactor package creation support code into a common location
Antoine Pitrou added the comment: I feel like it is already too large (it is over 1750 lines), and I did not want to create a third sibling test support module (there is also test/script_helper.py that overlaps with test.support). Do you think that the community would be open to refactoring test.support into a package for Python 3.3? This was meant to assist in increasing test coverage for Python 3.3 bugs. That's too late for 3.3, IMO. Whether or not test.support is too large is a matter of taste (we have larger files in the stdlib; what makes test.support annoying to work with is that it's a hodge-podge of utility functions with little care for consistency). Unless we can clearly separate it in thematic areas, making it a package would only make finding stuff more difficult. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15403 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue633930] Nested class __name__
Cheer Xiao added the comment: There is a bigger problem: class C: ... class D: ... pass ... repr(C) class '__main__.C' repr(C.D) class '__main__.D' Default repr on nested classes produce specious results. The problem become pratical when you have two nested classes C1.D and C2.D in module m, which end up being both m.D in exception traceback. Classes nested in function are likely to contain some information from the function arguments and are thus different on each function call, making it impossible to have a general way to name them. Thus I propose embedding the resulting class's `id` in __name__, like what i'm doing manually in a hulking way: def factory(foo): ... class C(object): ... bar = foo ... func_name = 'factory' ... C.__name__ = '%s generated classobj at 0x%x' % (func_name, id(C)) ... return C ... factory(0) class '__main__.factory generated classobj at 0x32273c0' factory(0) class '__main__.factory generated classobj at 0x32245b0' Please consider reopening this issue. -- nosy: +xiaq ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue633930 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15403] Refactor package creation support code into a common location
Chris Jerdonek added the comment: At this point, would you advise me to add even more to the existing hodge podge, or to create a third sibling test support module? My patch adds closely related test support functionality. Incidentally, this discussion relates to the point I was getting at in the python-dev thread in the past couple days about how restrictions on refactoring test support code for maintenance releases can affect the quality of our test code. I am still struggling with how to approach that. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15403 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15478] UnicodeDecodeError on OSError on Windows with undecodable (bytes) filename
Atsuo Ishimoto added the comment: +1 for keeping the file name unchanged. This solution is not very compatible with prior versions, but simple and least-surprise. I prefer other platforms than Windows to use same method to build OSError. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15478 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15403] Refactor package creation support code into a common location
Antoine Pitrou added the comment: I don't mind refactoring test support routines in maintenance release. I said it was too late for 3.3 because the beta period is closing; but it could be fine for 3.3.1 ;) As for the way forward, I see three possibilites: 1) put everying in test.support, as a single module (that includes folding script_helper into it) 2) make test.support a package of thematic modules 3) refactor test.support into a variety of independent modules (script_helper, import_helper, socket_helper, etc.); a small test.support providing fundamental features such as TESTFN could remain My personal preference would be for 1) or 3). But whatever we choose, we should do it consistently. Having a large test.support + a supportlib package + some independent helpers is not a good idea. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15403 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15467] Updating __sizeof__ tests
Changes by Meador Inge mead...@gmail.com: -- stage: - committed/rejected type: - behavior ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15467 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue14803] Add feature to allow code execution prior to __main__ invocation
Ned Batchelder added the comment: Chris, I'm not sure how to answer your questions. The more powerful and flexible, the better. There is no must here. I'm looking for a way to avoid the hacks coverage.py has used in the past to measure coverage in subprocesses. A language feature that allowed me to externally configure the interpreter to run some of my code first would allow me to do that. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue14803 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15475] Correct __sizeof__ support for itertools
Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: Patches updated on Meador's remarks. Tests updated to use new test.support helpers. -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26576/itertools_sizeof-3.3-2.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15475 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15475] Correct __sizeof__ support for itertools
Changes by Serhiy Storchaka storch...@gmail.com: Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26577/itertools_sizeof-3.2-2.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15475 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15475] Correct __sizeof__ support for itertools
Changes by Serhiy Storchaka storch...@gmail.com: Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26578/itertools_sizeof-2.7-2.patch ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15475 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15475] Correct __sizeof__ support for itertools
Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: Sorry, on Martin's remarks. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15475 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15436] __sizeof__ is not documented
Martin v. Löwis added the comment: rhettinger: users frequently need sys.getsizeof. See, for example, http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1331471/in-memory-size-of-python-stucture http://stackoverflow.com/questions/449560/how-do-i-determine-the-size-of-an-object-in-python http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2117255/python-deep-getsizeof-list-with-contents http://stackoverflow.com/questions/11301295/measure-object-size-accurately-in-python-sys-getsizeof-not-functioning [and so on] In what cases, do you think, it generates meaningless results? I find the results for the shared-keys dictionary quite meaningful and natural. sys.getsizeof is certainly CPython-specific. However, __sizeof__ is not just an implementation detail of sys.getsizeof, just as __len__ is not an implementation detail of len(). Authors of extension types are supposed to implement it if object.__sizeof__ is incorrect. -- nosy: +loewis ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15436 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15487] Correct __sizeof__ support for buffered I/O
Meador Inge added the comment: Serhiy, I didn't analyze it too in depth, but why aren't the test cases using the __sizeof__ support work you implemented for issue15467? I think these tests should be using the more exact method like your other '__sizeof__' patches. -- nosy: +meador.inge stage: needs patch - patch review ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15487 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15487] Correct __sizeof__ support for buffered I/O
Serhiy Storchaka added the comment:
Instead of putting this in MiscIOTest, you could use the relevant
class-specific test cases.
Thank you, good advice. Here is updated patch.
--
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file26579/bufferedio_sizeof-2.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue15487
___diff -r d43ff8eb4cb3 Lib/test/test_io.py
--- a/Lib/test/test_io.py Sun Jul 29 16:38:45 2012 +0200
+++ b/Lib/test/test_io.py Sun Jul 29 19:30:56 2012 +0300
@@ -802,6 +802,20 @@
buf.raw = x
+class SizeofTest:
+
+@support.cpython_only
+def test_sizeof(self):
+bufsize1 = 4096
+bufsize2 = 8192
+rawio = self.MockRawIO()
+bufio = self.tp(rawio, buffer_size=bufsize1)
+size = sys.getsizeof(bufio) - bufsize1
+rawio = self.MockRawIO()
+bufio = self.tp(rawio, buffer_size=bufsize2)
+self.assertEqual(sys.getsizeof(bufio), size + bufsize2)
+
+
class BufferedReaderTest(unittest.TestCase, CommonBufferedTests):
read_mode = rb
@@ -999,7 +1013,7 @@
failed for {}: {} != 0.format(n,
rawio._extraneous_reads))
-class CBufferedReaderTest(BufferedReaderTest):
+class CBufferedReaderTest(BufferedReaderTest, SizeofTest):
tp = io.BufferedReader
def test_constructor(self):
@@ -1260,7 +1274,7 @@
self.tp(self.MockRawIO(), 8, 12)
-class CBufferedWriterTest(BufferedWriterTest):
+class CBufferedWriterTest(BufferedWriterTest, SizeofTest):
tp = io.BufferedWriter
def test_constructor(self):
@@ -1650,7 +1664,7 @@
# You can't construct a BufferedRandom over a non-seekable stream.
test_unseekable = None
-class CBufferedRandomTest(BufferedRandomTest):
+class CBufferedRandomTest(BufferedRandomTest, SizeofTest):
tp = io.BufferedRandom
def test_constructor(self):
diff -r d43ff8eb4cb3 Modules/_io/bufferedio.c
--- a/Modules/_io/bufferedio.c Sun Jul 29 16:38:45 2012 +0200
+++ b/Modules/_io/bufferedio.c Sun Jul 29 19:30:56 2012 +0300
@@ -398,6 +398,17 @@
Py_TYPE(self)-tp_free((PyObject *)self);
}
+static PyObject *
+buffered_sizeof(buffered *self, void *unused)
+{
+Py_ssize_t res;
+
+res = sizeof(buffered);
+if (self-buffer)
+res += self-buffer_size;
+return PyLong_FromSsize_t(res);
+}
+
static int
buffered_traverse(buffered *self, visitproc visit, void *arg)
{
@@ -1699,6 +1710,7 @@
{seek, (PyCFunction)buffered_seek, METH_VARARGS},
{tell, (PyCFunction)buffered_tell, METH_NOARGS},
{truncate, (PyCFunction)buffered_truncate, METH_VARARGS},
+{__sizeof__, (PyCFunction)buffered_sizeof, METH_NOARGS},
{NULL, NULL}
};
@@ -2079,6 +2091,7 @@
{flush, (PyCFunction)buffered_flush, METH_NOARGS},
{seek, (PyCFunction)buffered_seek, METH_VARARGS},
{tell, (PyCFunction)buffered_tell, METH_NOARGS},
+{__sizeof__, (PyCFunction)buffered_sizeof, METH_NOARGS},
{NULL, NULL}
};
@@ -2470,6 +2483,7 @@
{readline, (PyCFunction)buffered_readline, METH_VARARGS},
{peek, (PyCFunction)buffered_peek, METH_VARARGS},
{write, (PyCFunction)bufferedwriter_write, METH_VARARGS},
+{__sizeof__, (PyCFunction)buffered_sizeof, METH_NOARGS},
{NULL, NULL}
};
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15486] Standardised mechanism for stripping importlib frames from tracebacks
Changes by Meador Inge mead...@gmail.com: -- nosy: +meador.inge ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15486 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue14803] Add feature to allow code execution prior to __main__ invocation
Chris Jerdonek added the comment: Okay, then in the interest of understanding why various alternatives fail, I'll just throw out the suggestion or question that I had in mind because I don't see it mentioned above or on the web page. Why wouldn't it work to define an alias or script that invokes the desired python -m ..., and then when you call your test suite (using a potentially different -m ...), you set sys.executable to that script so that subprocesses in your code under test will invoke it? (coverage.py could do all of this under the hood so that the user need not be aware of it.) Or would this work just fine, but that it's an example of the kind of hack that you're trying to avoid? -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue14803 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15487] Correct __sizeof__ support for buffered I/O
Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: Serhiy, I didn't analyze it too in depth, but why aren't the test cases using the __sizeof__ support work you implemented for issue15467? I think these tests should be using the more exact method like your other '__sizeof__' patches. Because struct has not codes for Py_off_t and PyThread_type_lock. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15487 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15403] Refactor package creation support code into a common location
Chris Jerdonek added the comment: Thanks for your thoughts. For the purposes of this patch, I will change to putting the new support functionality in test.support. Going forward, if we could do some of the refactoring for 3.3.1, that would be great. :) I worry that the third option may make things worse because it would become less obvious where all of the different test support functionality is located. Are you opposed to (2), or is it simply less favorable? The transition to (2) could be a gradual one beginning with two or even one module inside the package. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15403 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15403] Refactor package creation support code into a common location
Antoine Pitrou added the comment: Are you opposed to (2), or is it simply less favorable? Less favorable, because it produces longer import strings (test.support.some_helper instead of test.some_helper). -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15403 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15436] __sizeof__ is not documented
Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: sys.getsizeof is certainly CPython-specific. However, __sizeof__ is not just an implementation detail of sys.getsizeof, just as __len__ is not an implementation detail of len(). Authors of extension types are supposed to implement it if object.__sizeof__ is incorrect. I think there is one difference between __len__ and __sizeof__. __sizeof__ should be overloaded only for C-implemented classes. IMHO, it is a part of C API. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15436 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15403] Refactor package creation support code into a common location
Chris Jerdonek added the comment: Less favorable, because it produces longer import strings (test.support.some_helper instead of test.some_helper). This can be addressed by exposing the API in __init__.py though (as does, say, the unittest package), no? -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15403 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue1692335] Fix exception pickling: Move initial args assignment to BaseException.__new__
Georg Brandl added the comment: Please reopen if you think it should be backported. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue1692335 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15487] Correct __sizeof__ support for buffered I/O
Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset 8a02a93c803a by Antoine Pitrou in branch '3.2': Issue #15487: Add a __sizeof__ implementation for buffered I/O objects. http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/8a02a93c803a New changeset 1d811e1097ed by Antoine Pitrou in branch 'default': Issue #15487: Add a __sizeof__ implementation for buffered I/O objects. http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/1d811e1097ed -- nosy: +python-dev ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15487 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15403] Refactor package creation support code into a common location
Antoine Pitrou added the comment: Le dimanche 29 juillet 2012 à 17:00 +, Chris Jerdonek a écrit : Chris Jerdonek added the comment: Less favorable, because it produces longer import strings (test.support.some_helper instead of test.some_helper). This can be addressed by exposing the API in __init__.py though (as does, say, the unittest package), no? Yes, that's right. -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15403 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
[issue15487] Correct __sizeof__ support for buffered I/O
Roundup Robot added the comment: New changeset 1102e86b8739 by Antoine Pitrou in branch '2.7': Issue #15487: Add a __sizeof__ implementation for buffered I/O objects. http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/1102e86b8739 -- ___ Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue15487 ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
