Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


Skip to content

Navigation Menu

Sign in
Appearance settings

Search code, repositories, users, issues, pull requests...

Provide feedback

We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Sign up
Appearance settings

gh-124176:create_autospec must not change how dataclass defaults are mocked#124724

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 ourterms of service andprivacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub?Sign in to your account

Open
sobolevn wants to merge5 commits intopython:main
base:main
Choose a base branch
Loading
fromsobolevn:issue-124176-2
Open
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from1 commit
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
15 changes: 15 additions & 0 deletionsLib/test/test_unittest/testmock/testhelpers.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
Expand Up@@ -1107,6 +1107,21 @@ class WithNonFields:
with self.assertRaisesRegex(AttributeError, msg):
mock.b

def test_dataclass_with_wider_default(self):
# If field defines an actual default, we don't need to change
# the default type. Since this is how it used to work before #124176
@dataclass
class WithWiderDefault:
narrow_default: int | None = field(default=30)

for mock in [
create_autospec(WithWiderDefault, instance=True),
create_autospec(WithWiderDefault()),
]:
with self.subTest(mock=mock):
self.assertIs(mock.narrow_default.__class__, int)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

I feel both of these tests would be clearer if they actually showed what the thing ends up being, not just it's type, something like:

Suggested change
self.assertIs(mock.narrow_default.__class__,int)
self.assertIs(mock.narrow_default.__class__,int)
self.assertEqual(mock.narrow_default,30)

ncoghlan reacted with thumbs up emoji
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others.Learn more.

Adding something along these lines would also distinguish the cases where we're expecting to mock a specific value from those where we're deriving an instance spec from a declared runtime type



class TestCallList(unittest.TestCase):

def test_args_list_contains_call_list(self):
Expand Down
8 changes: 5 additions & 3 deletionsLib/unittest/mock.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
Expand Up@@ -2758,13 +2758,15 @@ def create_autospec(spec, spec_set=False, instance=False, _parent=None,
f'[object={spec!r}]')
is_async_func = _is_async_func(spec)

entries =[(entry, _missing) for entry in dir(spec)]
base_entries ={entry: _missing for entry in dir(spec)}
if is_type and instance and is_dataclass(spec):
dataclass_fields = fields(spec)
entries.extend((f.name, f.type) for f in dataclass_fields)
entries = {f.name: f.type for f in dataclass_fields}
entries.update(base_entries)
_kwargs = {'spec': [f.name for f in dataclass_fields]}
else:
_kwargs = {'spec': spec}
entries = base_entries

if spec_set:
_kwargs = {'spec_set': spec}
Expand DownExpand Up@@ -2822,7 +2824,7 @@ def create_autospec(spec, spec_set=False, instance=False, _parent=None,
_name='()', _parent=mock,
wraps=wrapped)

for entry, original in entries:
for entry, original in entries.items():
if _is_magic(entry):
# MagicMock already does the useful magic methods for us
continue
Expand Down

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp