Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 34k
bpo-33073: Adding as_integer_ratio to ints.#8750
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Conversation
lisroach commented Aug 12, 2018 • edited by bedevere-bot
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
edited by bedevere-bot
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Objects/longobject.c Outdated
| PyObject*result_pair=NULL; | ||
| denominator=PyLong_FromLong(1); | ||
| result_pair=PyTuple_Pack(2, self, denominator); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If PyLong_FromLong returns NULL then PyTuple_Pack and Py_DECREF(denominator) will fail.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think the whole function can be replaced with return PyTuple_Pack(2, self, _PyLong_One).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@pablogsal But PyLong_FromLong always receive the 1. How could it fail?
pablogsalAug 14, 2018 • edited
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
edited
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The contract of PyLong_FromLong says that it can return NULL on failure. Even if the current implementation (that uses the array of small ints) makes it improbable/impossible to fail, this can change in the future without changing the external API.
Objects/longobject.c Outdated
| Return a pair of integers, whose ratio is exactly equal to the original int | ||
| and with a positive denominator. | ||
| Raise OverflowError on infinities and a ValueError on NaNs. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
An int can never be any of these things - remove this line
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes. math.inf is float class
Lib/test/test_long.py Outdated
| deftest_as_integer_ratio(self): | ||
| tests= [10, 0, -10, 1, 3] | ||
| forvalueintests: | ||
| self.assertEqual((value).as_integer_ratio(), (value, 1)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nit: no parens needed around value
| Return a pair of integers whose ratio is exactly equal to the original integer | ||
| and with a positive denominator. The integer ratio of integers (whole numbers) | ||
| is always the integer as the numerator and 1 as the denominator. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
A versionadded directive needs to be added. Also, the developer's guide states that reST files should use an indentation of 3 spaces.
Objects/longobject.c Outdated
| int_as_integer_ratio_impl(PyObject*self) | ||
| /*[clinic end generated code: output=e60803ae1cc8621a input=ce9c7768a1287fb9]*/ | ||
| { | ||
| returnPyTuple_Pack(2, self, _PyLong_One) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There's a missing semicolon at the end of this line; I think that's why the continuous integration builds are failing.
Also, please change the indentation of this line to 4 spaces instead of 2 spaces, following PEP7. Thanks!
mdickinson commented Aug 25, 2018
@lisroach Thanks for the update. I've pushed a commit that should fix the failing test_doctest. |
mdickinson left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@lisroach If you're okay with my recent updates, I think this PR is ready to merge.
Objects/longobject.c Outdated
| int_as_integer_ratio_impl(PyObject*self) | ||
| /*[clinic end generated code: output=e60803ae1cc8621a input=c1aea0aa6fb85c28]*/ | ||
| { | ||
| returnPyTuple_Pack(2, self, _PyLong_One); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
True.as_integer_ratio() will return (True, 1). It should return (1, 1).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmm; good point. There's a precedent here in the form of True.numerator, which returns 1.
| Return a pair of integers, whose ratio is exactly equal to the original int | ||
| and with a positive denominator. | ||
| >>> (10).as_integer_ratio() |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do we need so much examples in a docstring?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it's useful to have at least one positive and one negative example, so that it's obvious at a glance that the behaviour for negatives is to give (for example) (-5, 1) rather than (5, -1). I could imagine users thinking that 0 was somehow a special case, too, so I like that we have the 0 example there.
Lib/test/test_long.py Outdated
| self.assertEqual(type(value>>shift), int) | ||
| deftest_as_integer_ratio(self): | ||
| tests= [10, 0, -10, 1, 3] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why so much similar cases are needed?
Add tests for booleans and other int subclasses. Check types of numerator and denominator.
Doc/library/stdtypes.rst Outdated
| Return a pair of integers whose ratio is exactly equal to the original | ||
| integer and with a positive denominator. The integer ratio of integers | ||
| (whole numbers) is always the integer as the numerator and 1 as the |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
``1``
mdickinson left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Changing my approval due to the issues Serhiy noted. @lisroach do you want to tackle the outstanding comments? I'm happy to pick this up if not.
bedevere-bot commented Aug 25, 2018
A Python core developer has requested some changes be made to your pull request before we can consider merging it. If you could please address their requests along with any other requests in other reviews from core developers that would be appreciated. Once you have made the requested changes, please leave a comment on this pull request containing the phrase |
lisroach commented Sep 10, 2018
I have made the requested changes; please review again. I am not sure if I could do the boolean check better- somehow in one line? I'm open to advice! Thanks for all the reviews @mdickinson and @serhiy-storchaka it's been really helpful! |
lisroach commented Sep 13, 2018
@eric-wieser I believe Serhiy's thinking is correct, it should be (1, 1). >>>classInt(int): ... pass ... >>>x=Int(42) >>> type(+x) <class'int'>>>>type(+True) <class'int'> |
Lib/test/test_long.py Outdated
| classFoo(enum.IntEnum): | ||
| X=42 | ||
| self.assertEqual(Foo.X.as_integer_ratio(), (42, 1)) | ||
| assert(type(Foo.X.as_integer_ratio()[0] ==int)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This should be: self.assertEqual(type(Foo.X.as_integer_ratio()[0], int). Unittest doesn't use assertion statements.
Objects/longobject.c Outdated
| returnPyTuple_Pack(2, self, _PyLong_One); | ||
| else{ | ||
| PyObject*temp=PyNumber_Positive(self); | ||
| Py_DECREF(temp); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The DECREF needs to occur after building the tuple; otherwise, the Python integer object can (and likely will) disappear before it gets used.
Objects/longobject.c Outdated
| ifPyLong_CheckExact(self) | ||
| returnPyTuple_Pack(2, self, _PyLong_One); | ||
| else{ | ||
| PyObject*temp=PyNumber_Positive(self); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We need another way to do this. The intent of this code is to construct a regular integer instance from an instance of an int subclass. The problem with PyNumber_Positive() is that the subclass can itself define pos() to return something other than an exact int. Elsewhere, we use _PyLong_Copy for this purpose.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is there a reason why PyNumber_Index does not call _PyLong_Copy?
bedevere-bot commented Sep 13, 2018
A Python core developer has requested some changes be made to your pull request before we can consider merging it. If you could please address their requests along with any other requests in other reviews from core developers that would be appreciated. Once you have made the requested changes, please leave a comment on this pull request containing the phrase |
Am checking to see the Serhiy's issues are resolved.
eric-wieser commented Sep 14, 2018
Reviving a comment hidden away above - should |
| { | ||
| ifPyLong_CheckExact(self){ | ||
| returnPyTuple_Pack(2, self, _PyLong_One); | ||
| } else{ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
else{ should be on the next line per PEP 7.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Missing parens on the if too
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
eric-wieser commented Sep 14, 2018 • edited
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
edited
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Despite the missing null check and invalid C syntax that works only because of a macro? |
rhettinger commented Sep 14, 2018
Eric, I didn't see your comments prior to merging. See PR 9297 for the cleanup. The part that was fine as-is was using PyTuple_Pack() on two different code paths. |
eric-wieser commented Sep 14, 2018 • edited
Loading Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
edited
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Agreed, the two code paths thing was unimportant. #9297 seems to address all my comments, other than the question about |
rhettinger commented Sep 14, 2018
Can you note your review on 9297 please. |
eric-wieser commented Sep 14, 2018
If that's aimed at me, I don't know what you're asking me to do. |
serhiy-storchaka left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This PR was merged too soon. There are several issues with it. See also comments by @sir-sigurd and @eric-wieser.
| self.assertEqual(False.as_integer_ratio(), (0, 1)) | ||
| assert(type(True.as_integer_ratio()[0])==int) | ||
| assert(type(False.as_integer_ratio()[0])==int) | ||
| self.assertEqual(type(True.as_integer_ratio()[0]),int) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Test also the denumerator type.
| ifPyLong_CheckExact(self){ | ||
| returnPyTuple_Pack(2, self, _PyLong_One); | ||
| } else{ | ||
| PyObject*numerator=_PyLong_Copy(self); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Use the same same code as for for the numerator getter.
Test the result for NULL.
| was lifted. | ||
| (Contributed by Serhiy Storchaka in :issue:`32489`.) | ||
| * The ``int`` type now has a new ``as_integer_ratio`` method compatible |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Add links:
:class:`int` :meth:`~int.as_integer_ratio` :meth:`float.as_integer_ratio`serhiy-storchaka commented Sep 14, 2018
This is a different issue. And I think that it should not. |
Adding as_integer_ratio to ints to make them more interoperable with floats.
https://bugs.python.org/issue33073