[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Change by Serhiy Storchaka : -- components: +Tests -Interpreter Core resolution: -> fixed stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed versions: +Python 3.6, Python 3.8 ___ Python tracker

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: New changeset 9b33ca0f4d459c165d711778734b6e1bdc3ec35d by Serhiy Storchaka (Miss Islington (bot)) in branch '3.6': [3.6] bpo-34136: Make test_do_not_recreate_annotations more reliable. (GH-8364) (GH-8366)

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: New changeset 23a3297ff1076d91ca6d70caadf9606f1fee0776 by Serhiy Storchaka (Miss Islington (bot)) in branch '3.7': [3.7] bpo-34136: Make test_do_not_recreate_annotations more reliable. (GH-8364) (GH-8365)

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: New changeset c206f0d1375fab7b58c19a6be3e68e316f718c66 by Serhiy Storchaka in branch 'master': bpo-34136: Make test_do_not_recreate_annotations more lenient. (GH-8437) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/c206f0d1375fab7b58c19a6be3e68e316f718c66

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Change by Serhiy Storchaka : -- pull_requests: +7962 ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe:

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Guido van Rossum added the comment: > Did you consider my suggestion to make it a "SyntaxError" for > "del __annotations__" on a class level or even module level or at all? > Or does this go too far? That's not reasonable. __annotations__ is just an identifier. There are lots of other things

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Kay Hayen added the comment: As somebody whose opinion is even less important: Did you consider my suggestion to make it a "SyntaxError" for "del __annotations__" on a class level or even module level or at all? Or does this go too far? Yours, Kay --

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Guido van Rossum added the comment: I wouldn’t object. Of course my opinion no longer matters that much. On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 9:33 AM Serhiy Storchaka wrote: > > Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: > > Shouldn't it be deleted in 3.7+ too? The behavior tested after PR 8364 > (falling back

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: Shouldn't it be deleted in 3.7+ too? The behavior tested after PR 8364 (falling back to the global __annotations__) looks to me even more questionable than NameError. -- ___ Python tracker

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Guido van Rossum added the comment: Thanks for the research. At this point I'm wondering what this test is testing. There is no prescribed behavior once you delete __annotations__ from the scope -- it is not a supported operation. At the same time I don't want to add any code enforcing that

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: In the edition of PR 8364 the test is failed on 3.6. def test_do_not_recreate_annotations(self): annotations = {} # Don't rely on the existence of the '__annotations__' global. with support.swap_item(globals(), '__annotations__',

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Change by miss-islington : -- pull_requests: +7900 ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe:

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: New changeset 06ca3f0c09d017b9d741553818459cca2d5da587 by Serhiy Storchaka in branch 'master': bpo-34136: Make test_do_not_recreate_annotations more reliable. (GH-8364) https://github.com/python/cpython/commit/06ca3f0c09d017b9d741553818459cca2d5da587

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Change by miss-islington : -- pull_requests: +7899 ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe:

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Change by Serhiy Storchaka : -- keywords: +patch pull_requests: +7898 stage: -> patch review ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: Sorry for my mistake, yes, I meant Nuitka. -- ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Guido van Rossum added the comment: (Serhiy: I think you meant Nuitka, not numba -- Nuitka is a Python-to-C++ compiler, and Kay is its author. Somehow he managed to confuse us all. :-) I suspect that the way `python3 -m test` runs the tests whose name you pass on the command line causes

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: Oh, I missed that this issue is about the test from the CPython testsuite. I thought it is about the Numba specific tests. It is strange that this test is passed when run as ./python -m test test_opcodes but is failed when run as ./python -m

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Terry J. Reedy added the comment: Yes, the test should be removed, commented out, skipped, or made to work, depending on intentions. Test first is for private branches. -- nosy: +terry.reedy ___ Python tracker

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Guido van Rossum added the comment: The test fails on CPython master, so shouldn't it be removed? Don't we have a policy that all tests must pass on master? This is what I see: cpython38$ ./python.exe Lib/test/test_opcodes.py ./python.exe Lib/test/test_opcodes.py .F..

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: Sorry. I thought the discussion issue32550 shows that this CPython behavior change was intended, but it is not a part of Python language, and alternate implementations can have different behavior. But I expected that someone of participants with better

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Guido van Rossum added the comment: Serhiy, what question do you want us to answer? On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 5:22 AM Serhiy Storchaka wrote: > > Change by Serhiy Storchaka : > > > -- > nosy: +Mark.Shannon, gvanrossum, levkivskyi > > ___ > Python

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Change by Serhiy Storchaka : -- nosy: +Mark.Shannon, gvanrossum, levkivskyi ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Kay Hayen added the comment: Thanks for pointing out, where it comes from, Serhiy. So, should the test case be removed then. I still am not so sure about the bug nature. Because using the standard mechanism will do this: x : int class C: del __annotations__ x : float y : int

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

Serhiy Storchaka added the comment: See issue32550. -- nosy: +serhiy.storchaka ___ Python tracker ___ ___ Python-bugs-list mailing

[issue34136] Del on class __annotations__ regressed, failing test

New submission from Kay Hayen : I am getting this: PYTHONPATH=`pwd` /c/Python37_32/python test/test_opcodes.py .F.. == FAIL: test_do_not_recreate_annotations (__main__.OpcodeTest)