3031: mangle exported functions for PyPy r=davidhewitt a=mattip
I run HEAD of PyO3 with HEAD of some PyPy branches, and noticed that the py3.10 branch (which implements python3.10) [fails to properly build](https://github.com/pypy/binary-testing/actions/runs/4334873617/jobs/7569059852#step:6:179). The failure was a missing export:
```
/home/runner/work/binary-testing/binary-testing/pyo3/src/exceptions.rs:715: \
undefined reference to `PyExc_EncodingWarning'
collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
```
So I grepped around in the code for `Py_3_10` to see what new functions were added and found a few that needed PyPy-specific exports.
Co-authored-by: Matti Picus <matti.picus@gmail.com>
2899: RFC: Provide a special purpose FromPyObject impl for byte slices r=davidhewitt a=adamreichold
This enables efficiently and safely getting a byte slice from either bytes or byte arrays.
The main issue I see here is discoverability, i.e. should this be mention in the docs of `PyBytes` and `PyByteArray` or in the guide?
It is also not completely clear whether this really _fixes_ the issue.
Closes#2888
Co-authored-by: Adam Reichold <adam.reichold@t-online.de>
2952: Fix allow_threads segfault r=davidhewitt a=OliverBalfour
Please see the corresponding issue **#2951** for details. This PR adds the failing test from the issue and then a fix for it. The fix simply calls `ReferencePool::update_counts` at the end of `allow_threads` to ensure objects aren't accidentally deleted too soon.
Co-authored-by: Oliver Balfour <oliver.leo.balfour@gmail.com>
2947: change PyModule::add_class to return an error if class creation fails r=adamreichold a=davidhewitt
Related to #2942
At the moment there are panics deep in the `#[pyclass]` machinery when initialising the type fails. This PR adjusts a number of these functions to return `PyResult` instead, so that we can handle the error more appropriately further down the pipeline.
For example, take the following snippet:
```rust
#[pyclass(extends = PyBool)]
struct ExtendsBool;
#[pymodule]
fn pyo3_scratch(_py: Python, m: &PyModule) -> PyResult<()> {
m.add_class::<ExtendsBool>()?;
Ok(())
}
```
Currently, importing this module will fail with a panic:
```
TypeError: type 'bool' is not an acceptable base type
thread '<unnamed>' panicked at 'An error occurred while initializing class ExtendsBool', /Users/david/Dev/pyo3/src/pyclass.rs:412:5
note: run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` environment variable to display a backtrace
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<string>", line 1, in <module>
File "/Users/david/.virtualenvs/pyo3/lib/python3.10/site-packages/pyo3_scratch/__init__.py", line 1, in <module>
from .pyo3_scratch import *
pyo3_runtime.PanicException: An error occurred while initializing class ExtendsBool
```
After this PR, this import still fails, but with a slightly cleaner, more Pythonic error:
```
TypeError: type 'bool' is not an acceptable base type
The above exception was the direct cause of the following exception:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<string>", line 1, in <module>
File "/Users/david/.virtualenvs/pyo3/lib/python3.10/site-packages/pyo3_scratch/__init__.py", line 1, in <module>
from .pyo3_scratch import *
RuntimeError: An error occurred while initializing class ExtendsBool
```
Co-authored-by: David Hewitt <1939362+davidhewitt@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Adam Reichold <adam.reichold@t-online.de>
2944: optimize sequence conversion for list and tuple r=adamreichold a=davidhewitt
closes#2943
Avoid using `PyObject_IsInstance` for checking if lists or tuples are sequences, as we know they are always sequences.
Co-authored-by: David Hewitt <1939362+davidhewitt@users.noreply.github.com>
2914: correct ffi definition of PyIter_Check r=davidhewitt a=davidhewitt
Closes#2913
It looks like what is happening is that PyO3 was relying on an outdated macro form of `PyIter_Check` which is now a CPython implementation detail, which would explain why it was behaving inconsistently on different platforms (likely due to differences in linkers / implementations).
The test I've pushed succeeds, but fails to compile due to a hygiene bug! I'm done for tonight so I'll take a look at that soon and then rebase this after.
Co-authored-by: David Hewitt <1939362+davidhewitt@users.noreply.github.com>
2912: Add `PyDict.update()` and `PyDict.update_if_missing()` r=davidhewitt a=samuelcolvin
Fix#2910
Note, I'd also be happy to remove the `override_` argument from merge and perhaps rename it to `update_missing` or similar to give a cleaner API. LMK what you think.
Please consider adding the following to your pull request:
- [x] an entry for this PR in newsfragments
- [x] docs to all new functions and / or detail in the guide
- [x] tests for all new or changed functions
Co-authored-by: Samuel Colvin <s@muelcolvin.com>
2923: hygiene: fix `#[pymethods(crate = "...")]` r=davidhewitt a=davidhewitt
Got to the bottom of the hygiene issue in test of #2914
Turns out that `#[pymethods] #[pyo3(crate = "...")]` works, but `#[pymethods(crate = "...")]` was ignoring the argument.
Added a tweak to fix this and a snippet in the hygiene test (which fails on `main`).
2924: remove unneeded into_iter calls r=davidhewitt a=davidhewitt
Clippy complaining about these to me this morning locally.
Co-authored-by: David Hewitt <1939362+davidhewitt@users.noreply.github.com>
2904: refactor docstring generation code r=mejrs a=davidhewitt
As a first step towards #2866 this is a tweak to the macro code which generates Python docstrings. This PR refactors the behaviour so that instead of always creating a `concat!` expression to generate a nul-terminated string, this will only happen if a Rust 1.54+ macro doc is present (e.g. `#[doc = include_str!(...)]`).
The default case now just collects all the `#[doc]` attributes into a single string.
This should make it easier to factor out the `text_signature` formatting, and avoids wasting compile time invoking the `concat!` macro when not necessary.
2921: Check to see if object is `None` before traversing r=davidhewitt a=neachdainn
Closes#2915
When using the C API directly, the intended way to call `visitproc` is via the `Py_VISIT` macro, which checks to see that the provided pointer is not null before passing it along to `visitproc`. Because PyO3 isn't using the macro, it needs to manually check that the pointer isn't null. Without this check, calling `visit.call(&obj)` where `let obj = None;` will segfault.
Co-authored-by: David Hewitt <1939362+davidhewitt@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Nate Kent <nate@nkent.net>
Closes#2915
When using the C API directly, the intended way to call `visitproc` is
via the `Py_VISIT` macro, which checks to see that the provided pointer
is not null before passing it along to `visitproc`. Because PyO3 isn't
using the macro, it needs to manually check that the pointer isn't null.
Without this check, calling `visit.call(&obj)` where `let obj = None;`
will segfault.
2796: Forward cfgs on pyclass fields to the method defs r=davidhewitt a=mejrs
With this and the cfg_attr PR, I don't need cfg_eval at all anymore :)
- [x] needs some more tests
Co-authored-by: mejrs <>
2843: remove functionality deprecated in 0.16 r=davidhewitt a=davidhewitt
Simple cleanup to remove all functionality marked deprecated in the 0.16 releases.
Co-authored-by: David Hewitt <1939362+davidhewitt@users.noreply.github.com>
2842: Stop leaking in `new_closure` r=adamreichold a=davidhewitt
This is a rebase of #2690 which simplifies the `MaybeLeaked` abstraction from that PR with just `Cow<'static, CStr>`.
This enabled me to annotate with `FIXME` all the places where we still leak; I wonder if we could potentially use `GILOnceCell` in future and statics to avoid those. As those callsities are in `#[pyclass]` and `#[pyfunction]` these are effectively in statics anyway, but it would be nice to tidy up.
Co-authored-by: David Hewitt <1939362+davidhewitt@users.noreply.github.com>
2838: pypy: re-enable PyFunction on 3.8+ r=davidhewitt a=davidhewitt
PyPy [fixed the crashes associated with `PyFunction](https://foss.heptapod.net/pypy/pypy/-/issues/3776#note_191626) in PyPy 7.3.10 (for 3.8+) - which I think is to be released shortly. So I think we should re-enable this API and treat it as a PyPy bug which users can mitigate by updating their PyPy.
Co-authored-by: David Hewitt <1939362+davidhewitt@users.noreply.github.com>
