-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.1k
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
feat: warnings wrappers to use from C++ #5291
Changes from 4 commits
0afa32f
3233262
0dcd917
1f50050
76d9e10
f4cf539
68cfd13
f98b5d4
24cebfa
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,76 @@ | ||
/* | ||
pybind11/warnings.h: Python warnings wrappers. | ||
|
||
Copyright (c) 2024 Jan Iwaszkiewicz <[email protected]> | ||
|
||
All rights reserved. Use of this source code is governed by a | ||
BSD-style license that can be found in the LICENSE file. | ||
*/ | ||
|
||
#pragma once | ||
|
||
#include "pybind11.h" | ||
#include "detail/common.h" | ||
|
||
PYBIND11_NAMESPACE_BEGIN(PYBIND11_NAMESPACE) | ||
|
||
PYBIND11_NAMESPACE_BEGIN(detail) | ||
|
||
inline bool PyWarning_Check(PyObject *obj) { | ||
int result = PyObject_IsSubclass(obj, PyExc_Warning); | ||
if (result == 1) { | ||
return true; | ||
} | ||
if (result == -1) { | ||
raise_from(PyExc_SystemError, | ||
"pybind11::detail::PyWarning_Check(): PyObject_IsSubclass() call failed."); | ||
throw error_already_set(); | ||
} | ||
return false; | ||
} | ||
|
||
PYBIND11_NAMESPACE_END(detail) | ||
|
||
PYBIND11_NAMESPACE_BEGIN(warnings) | ||
|
||
inline object | ||
new_warning_type(handle scope, const char *name, handle base = PyExc_RuntimeWarning) { | ||
if (!detail::PyWarning_Check(base.ptr())) { | ||
pybind11_fail("pybind11::warnings::new_warning_type(): cannot create custom warning, base " | ||
"must be a subclass of " | ||
"PyExc_Warning!"); | ||
} | ||
if (hasattr(scope, name)) { | ||
pybind11_fail("pybind11::warnings::new_warning_type(): an attribute with name \"" | ||
+ std::string(name) + "\" exists already."); | ||
} | ||
std::string full_name = scope.attr("__name__").cast<std::string>() + std::string(".") + name; | ||
auto *new_ex = PyErr_NewException(const_cast<char *>(full_name.c_str()), base.ptr(), nullptr); | ||
if (!new_ex) { | ||
raise_from(PyExc_SystemError, | ||
"pybind11::warnings::new_warning_type(): PyErr_NewException() call failed."); | ||
throw error_already_set(); | ||
} | ||
handle h(new_ex); | ||
auto obj = reinterpret_steal<object>(h); | ||
scope.attr(name) = obj; | ||
return obj; | ||
} | ||
|
||
// Similar to Python `warnings.warn()` | ||
inline void | ||
warn(const char *message, handle category = PyExc_RuntimeWarning, int stack_level = 2) { | ||
if (!detail::PyWarning_Check(category.ptr())) { | ||
pybind11_fail( | ||
"pybind11::warnings::warn(): cannot raise warning, category must be a subclass of " | ||
"PyExc_Warning!"); | ||
} | ||
|
||
if (PyErr_WarnEx(category.ptr(), message, stack_level) == -1) { | ||
throw error_already_set(); | ||
} | ||
} | ||
|
||
PYBIND11_NAMESPACE_END(warnings) | ||
|
||
PYBIND11_NAMESPACE_END(PYBIND11_NAMESPACE) |
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@ | ||
/* | ||
tests/test_warnings.cpp -- usage of warnings::warn() and warnings categories. | ||
|
||
Copyright (c) 2024 Jan Iwaszkiewicz <[email protected]> | ||
|
||
All rights reserved. Use of this source code is governed by a | ||
BSD-style license that can be found in the LICENSE file. | ||
*/ | ||
|
||
#include <pybind11/warnings.h> | ||
|
||
#include "pybind11_tests.h" | ||
|
||
#include <utility> | ||
|
||
namespace warning_helpers { | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Could you please put this in a namespace? Usually, in new code, I'd have this here:
This is because we're linking most tests together into one extension (something I wanted to change for years, but it's still like that). Without using namespaces we might get accidental ODR violations (in the link step). There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. See #5291 (comment) |
||
void warn_function(py::module &m, const char *name, py::handle category, const char *message) { | ||
m.def(name, [category, message]() { py::warnings::warn(message, category); }); | ||
} | ||
} // namespace warning_helpers | ||
|
||
class CustomWarning {}; | ||
|
||
TEST_SUBMODULE(warnings_, m) { | ||
|
||
// Test warning mechanism base | ||
m.def("raise_and_return", []() { | ||
std::string message = "Warning was raised!"; | ||
py::warnings::warn(message.c_str(), PyExc_Warning); | ||
return 21; | ||
}); | ||
|
||
m.def("raise_default", []() { py::warnings::warn("RuntimeWarning is raised!"); }); | ||
|
||
m.def("raise_from_cpython", | ||
[]() { py::warnings::warn("UnicodeWarning is raised!", PyExc_UnicodeWarning); }); | ||
|
||
m.def("raise_and_fail", | ||
[]() { py::warnings::warn("RuntimeError should be raised!", PyExc_Exception); }); | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This confused me:
Suggestion to change to:
I'd also change Actually: is "raise" a good term to use here (all test functions)? Because there is no "raise" in Maybe There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I see the motivation, I hope now names and messages are more self-explainatory/clear. |
||
|
||
// Test custom warnings | ||
PYBIND11_CONSTINIT static py::gil_safe_call_once_and_store<py::object> ex_storage; | ||
ex_storage.call_once_and_store_result([&]() { | ||
return py::warnings::new_warning_type(m, "CustomWarning", PyExc_DeprecationWarning); | ||
}); | ||
|
||
m.def("raise_custom", []() { | ||
py::warnings::warn("CustomWarning was raised!", ex_storage.get_stored()); | ||
return 37; | ||
}); | ||
|
||
m.def("register_duplicate_warning", | ||
[m]() { py::warnings::new_warning_type(m, "CustomWarning", PyExc_RuntimeWarning); }); | ||
|
||
// Bind warning categories | ||
warning_helpers::warn_function(m, "raise_base_warning", PyExc_Warning, "This is Warning!"); | ||
warning_helpers::warn_function( | ||
m, "raise_bytes_warning", PyExc_BytesWarning, "This is BytesWarning!"); | ||
warning_helpers::warn_function( | ||
m, "raise_deprecation_warning", PyExc_DeprecationWarning, "This is DeprecationWarning!"); | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'd delete all warning below: mostly because it doesn't exercise anything specific in your implementation, but also because it will look old after a few years, because we're likely to not keep up with new warning types, and the wall of repetitive code is distracting from potentially more important things. I think it's best to only keep There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I have removed them all as other functions like |
||
warning_helpers::warn_function( | ||
m, "raise_future_warning", PyExc_FutureWarning, "This is FutureWarning!"); | ||
warning_helpers::warn_function( | ||
m, "raise_import_warning", PyExc_ImportWarning, "This is ImportWarning!"); | ||
warning_helpers::warn_function(m, | ||
"raise_pending_deprecation_warning", | ||
PyExc_PendingDeprecationWarning, | ||
"This is PendingDeprecationWarning!"); | ||
warning_helpers::warn_function( | ||
m, "raise_resource_warning", PyExc_ResourceWarning, "This is ResourceWarning!"); | ||
warning_helpers::warn_function( | ||
m, "raise_runtime_warning", PyExc_RuntimeWarning, "This is RuntimeWarning!"); | ||
warning_helpers::warn_function( | ||
m, "raise_syntax_warning", PyExc_SyntaxWarning, "This is SyntaxWarning!"); | ||
warning_helpers::warn_function( | ||
m, "raise_unicode_warning", PyExc_UnicodeWarning, "This is UnicodeWarning!"); | ||
warning_helpers::warn_function( | ||
m, "raise_user_warning", PyExc_UserWarning, "This is UserWarning!"); | ||
} |
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,115 @@ | ||
from __future__ import annotations | ||
|
||
import warnings | ||
|
||
import pytest | ||
|
||
import pybind11_tests # noqa: F401 | ||
from pybind11_tests import warnings_ as m | ||
|
||
|
||
@pytest.mark.parametrize( | ||
("expected_category", "expected_message", "expected_value", "module_function"), | ||
[ | ||
(Warning, "Warning was raised!", 21, m.raise_and_return), | ||
(RuntimeWarning, "RuntimeWarning is raised!", None, m.raise_default), | ||
(UnicodeWarning, "UnicodeWarning is raised!", None, m.raise_from_cpython), | ||
], | ||
) | ||
def test_warning_simple( | ||
expected_category, expected_message, expected_value, module_function | ||
): | ||
with pytest.warns(Warning) as excinfo: | ||
value = module_function() | ||
|
||
assert issubclass(excinfo[0].category, expected_category) | ||
assert str(excinfo[0].message) == expected_message | ||
assert value == expected_value | ||
|
||
|
||
def test_warning_wrong_subclass_fail(): | ||
with pytest.raises(Exception) as excinfo: | ||
m.raise_and_fail() | ||
|
||
assert issubclass(excinfo.type, RuntimeError) | ||
assert ( | ||
str(excinfo.value) | ||
== "pybind11::warnings::warn(): cannot raise warning, category must be a subclass of PyExc_Warning!" | ||
) | ||
|
||
|
||
def test_warning_double_register_fail(): | ||
with pytest.raises(Exception) as excinfo: | ||
m.register_duplicate_warning() | ||
|
||
assert issubclass(excinfo.type, RuntimeError) | ||
assert ( | ||
str(excinfo.value) | ||
== 'pybind11::warnings::new_warning_type(): an attribute with name "CustomWarning" exists already.' | ||
) | ||
|
||
|
||
def test_warning_register(): | ||
assert m.CustomWarning is not None | ||
assert issubclass(m.CustomWarning, DeprecationWarning) | ||
|
||
with pytest.warns(m.CustomWarning) as excinfo: | ||
warnings.warn("This is warning from Python!", m.CustomWarning, stacklevel=1) | ||
|
||
assert issubclass(excinfo[0].category, DeprecationWarning) | ||
assert issubclass(excinfo[0].category, m.CustomWarning) | ||
assert str(excinfo[0].message) == "This is warning from Python!" | ||
|
||
|
||
@pytest.mark.parametrize( | ||
( | ||
"expected_category", | ||
"expected_base", | ||
"expected_message", | ||
"expected_value", | ||
"module_function", | ||
), | ||
[ | ||
( | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This seems to be the only one list item. I'd either remove the There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Yeah, I guess it's a leftover from previous iterations (not sure but looks like one:)). Removed! |
||
m.CustomWarning, | ||
DeprecationWarning, | ||
"CustomWarning was raised!", | ||
37, | ||
m.raise_custom, | ||
), | ||
], | ||
) | ||
def test_warning_custom( | ||
expected_category, expected_base, expected_message, expected_value, module_function | ||
): | ||
with pytest.warns(expected_category) as excinfo: | ||
value = module_function() | ||
|
||
assert issubclass(excinfo[0].category, expected_base) | ||
assert issubclass(excinfo[0].category, expected_category) | ||
assert str(excinfo[0].message) == expected_message | ||
assert value == expected_value | ||
|
||
|
||
@pytest.mark.parametrize( | ||
("expected_category", "module_function"), | ||
[ | ||
(Warning, m.raise_base_warning), | ||
(BytesWarning, m.raise_bytes_warning), | ||
(DeprecationWarning, m.raise_deprecation_warning), | ||
(FutureWarning, m.raise_future_warning), | ||
(ImportWarning, m.raise_import_warning), | ||
(PendingDeprecationWarning, m.raise_pending_deprecation_warning), | ||
(ResourceWarning, m.raise_resource_warning), | ||
(RuntimeWarning, m.raise_runtime_warning), | ||
(SyntaxWarning, m.raise_syntax_warning), | ||
(UnicodeWarning, m.raise_unicode_warning), | ||
(UserWarning, m.raise_user_warning), | ||
], | ||
) | ||
def test_warning_categories(expected_category, module_function): | ||
with pytest.warns(Warning) as excinfo: | ||
module_function() | ||
|
||
assert issubclass(excinfo[0].category, expected_category) | ||
assert str(excinfo[0].message) == f"This is {expected_category.__name__}!" |
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.
Two separate things things:
Using
handle
here is very common around the pybind11 codebase, before anynullptr
check. Theif (!new_ex)
below can stay as is.Question: Is the
const_cast
still needed? Could you please try? — Recently we removed Python 3.7 support on master.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.
const_cast
was originally not there, so it can be removed (as my local builds and now CIs shows to be true).