[issue24857] mock: Crash on comparing call_args with long strings

[Roundup Robot]

Roundup Robot added the comment:

New changeset 83ea55a1204a by Berker Peksag in branch '3.4':
Issue #24857: Comparing call_args to a long sequence now correctly returns a
https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/83ea55a1204a

New changeset df91c1879e56 by Berker Peksag in branch '3.5':
Issue #24857: Comparing call_args to a long sequence now correctly returns a
https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/df91c1879e56

New changeset 6853b4bc0b22 by Berker Peksag in branch 'default':
Issue #24857: Comparing call_args to a long sequence now correctly returns a
https://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/6853b4bc0b22

--
nosy: +python-dev

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue24857] mock: Crash on comparing call_args with long strings

[Berker Peksag]

Berker Peksag added the comment:

Thanks!

For the record, the __ne__ issue created by A Kaptur is issue 24997.

--
nosy: +berker.peksag
resolution:  -> fixed
stage: patch review -> resolved
status: open -> closed

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue24857] mock: Crash on comparing call_args with long strings

[A Kaptur]

A Kaptur added the comment:

It looks like there's a related bug in call_args around __ne__:

>>> m = Mock()
>>> m(1,2)

>>> m.call_args
call(1, 2)
>>> m.call_args == call(1,2)
True
>>> m.call_args != call(1,2)
True

Any reason not to define __ne__ as not __eq__? Otherwise it looks like you fall 
back to tuple.__ne__, which does the wrong thing here.

--
nosy: +akaptur

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue24857] mock: Crash on comparing call_args with long strings

[A Kaptur]

A Kaptur added the comment:

Here's a simple patch + test for the original bug. I'll file the __ne__ 
question separately.

--
keywords: +patch
stage: needs patch -> patch review
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file40348/issue24857.patch

___
Python tracker 

___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue24857] mock: Crash on comparing call_args with long strings

[Wilfred Hughes]

Changes by Wilfred Hughes yowilf...@gmail.com:


--
title: Crash on comparing call_args with long strings - mock: Crash on 
comparing call_args with long strings

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24857
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue24857] mock: Crash on comparing call_args with long strings

[Wilfred Hughes]

Wilfred Hughes added the comment:

This caught me by surprise and I spent a while debugging due to this issue. 
Isn't it reasonable that I can compare two values in Python without exceptions 
being raised?

 (1, 2) == foob
False

I'm happy to write a patch.

--

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24857
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue24857] mock: Crash on comparing call_args with long strings

[Wilfred Hughes]

Wilfred Hughes added the comment:

This bug is particularly subtle because it only applies to *long* strings.

 m.call_args == f
False
 m.call_args == fo
False
 m.call_args == foo
False
 m.call_args == foob
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File stdin, line 1, in module
  File build/bdist.linux-x86_64/egg/mock.py, line 2061, in __eq__
ValueError: too many values to unpack

--

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24857
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue24857] mock: Crash on comparing call_args with long strings

[Michael Foord]

Michael Foord added the comment:

Ok, fair enough.

--
resolution: not a bug - 
status: closed - open

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24857
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

[issue24857] mock: Crash on comparing call_args with long strings

[R. David Murray]

R. David Murray added the comment:

Yeah, if it isn't comparable it should return either False or NotImplemented, 
not raise an exception.  False would be better here, I think.

--
keywords: +easy
nosy: +r.david.murray

___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue24857
___
___
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com