Skip to content
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

bpo-33073: Adding as_integer_ratio to ints. #8750

Merged
merged 18 commits into from
Sep 14, 2018

Conversation

lisroach
Copy link
Contributor

@lisroach lisroach commented Aug 12, 2018

Adding as_integer_ratio to ints to make them more interoperable with floats.

https://bugs.python.org/issue33073

PyObject *result_pair = NULL;

denominator = PyLong_FromLong(1);
result_pair = PyTuple_Pack(2, self, denominator);
Copy link
Member

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.

Copy link
Contributor

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).

Copy link
Contributor

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?

Copy link
Member

@pablogsal pablogsal Aug 14, 2018

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.

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.
Copy link
Contributor

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

Copy link
Contributor

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

def test_as_integer_ratio(self):
tests = [10, 0, -10, 1, 3]
for value in tests:
self.assertEqual((value).as_integer_ratio(), (value, 1))
Copy link
Contributor

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.

Copy link
Contributor

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.

int_as_integer_ratio_impl(PyObject *self)
/*[clinic end generated code: output=e60803ae1cc8621a input=ce9c7768a1287fb9]*/
{
return PyTuple_Pack(2, self, _PyLong_One)
Copy link
Member

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
Copy link
Member

@lisroach Thanks for the update. I've pushed a commit that should fix the failing test_doctest.

Copy link
Member

@mdickinson mdickinson left a 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.

@mdickinson mdickinson added the type-feature A feature request or enhancement label Aug 25, 2018
int_as_integer_ratio_impl(PyObject *self)
/*[clinic end generated code: output=e60803ae1cc8621a input=c1aea0aa6fb85c28]*/
{
return PyTuple_Pack(2, self, _PyLong_One);
Copy link
Member

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).

Copy link
Member

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()
Copy link
Member

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?

Copy link
Member

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.

@@ -1349,6 +1349,11 @@ def test_shift_bool(self):
self.assertEqual(type(value << shift), int)
self.assertEqual(type(value >> shift), int)

def test_as_integer_ratio(self):
tests = [10, 0, -10, 1, 3]
Copy link
Member

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.


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
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

``1``

Copy link
Member

@mdickinson mdickinson left a 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
Copy link

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 I have made the requested changes; please review again. I will then notify any core developers who have left a review that you're ready for them to take another look at this pull request.

@lisroach
Copy link
Contributor Author

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
Copy link
Contributor Author

@eric-wieser I believe Serhiy's thinking is correct, it should be (1, 1).
Subclasses of int inherit the same operations of int, and those operations create instances of int (as opposed to creating an instance of the subclass). For example, if we look at the unary plus of int:

>>> class Int(int):
...     pass
...
>>> x = Int(42)
>>> type(+x)
<class 'int'>
>>> type(+True)
<class 'int'>

class Foo(enum.IntEnum):
X = 42
self.assertEqual(Foo.X.as_integer_ratio(), (42, 1))
assert(type(Foo.X.as_integer_ratio()[0] == int))
Copy link
Contributor

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.

return PyTuple_Pack(2, self, _PyLong_One);
else {
PyObject *temp = PyNumber_Positive(self);
Py_DECREF(temp);
Copy link
Contributor

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.

if PyLong_CheckExact(self)
return PyTuple_Pack(2, self, _PyLong_One);
else {
PyObject *temp = PyNumber_Positive(self);
Copy link
Contributor

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.

Copy link
Contributor

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
Copy link

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 I have made the requested changes; please review again. I will then notify any core developers who have left a review that you're ready for them to take another look at this pull request.

@rhettinger rhettinger dismissed mdickinson’s stale review September 14, 2018 05:34

Am checking to see the Serhiy's issues are resolved.

@eric-wieser
Copy link
Contributor

Reviving a comment hidden away above - should operator.index / PyNumber_Index / int->tp_as_number->nb_index call _PyLong_Copy too for consistency?

{
if PyLong_CheckExact(self) {
return PyTuple_Pack(2, self, _PyLong_One);
} else {
Copy link
Contributor

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.

Copy link
Contributor

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

@rhettinger rhettinger merged commit 5ac7043 into python:master Sep 14, 2018
@eric-wieser
Copy link
Contributor

eric-wieser commented Sep 14, 2018

ISTM, the code is reasonable as-is.

Despite the missing null check and invalid C syntax that works only because of a macro?

@rhettinger
Copy link
Contributor

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
Copy link
Contributor

eric-wieser commented Sep 14, 2018

Agreed, the two code paths thing was unimportant. #9297 seems to address all my comments, other than the question about nb_index, which is tangential anyway

@rhettinger
Copy link
Contributor

Can you note your review on 9297 please.

@eric-wieser
Copy link
Contributor

If that's aimed at me, I don't know what you're asking me to do.

Copy link
Member

@serhiy-storchaka serhiy-storchaka left a 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.

@@ -1365,20 +1365,20 @@ def test_as_integer_ratio_maxint(self):
def test_as_integer_ratio_bool(self):
self.assertEqual(True.as_integer_ratio(), (1, 1))
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)
Copy link
Member

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.

if PyLong_CheckExact(self) {
return PyTuple_Pack(2, self, _PyLong_One);
} else {
PyObject *numerator = _PyLong_Copy(self);
Copy link
Member

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.

@@ -91,6 +91,10 @@ Other Language Changes
was lifted.
(Contributed by Serhiy Storchaka in :issue:`32489`.)

* The ``int`` type now has a new ``as_integer_ratio`` method compatible
Copy link
Member

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
Copy link
Member

Reviving a comment hidden away above - should operator.index / PyNumber_Index / int->tp_as_number->nb_index call _PyLong_Copy too for consistency?

This is a different issue. And I think that it should not.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
type-feature A feature request or enhancement
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.