-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 34.4k
gh-137814: Fix __qualname__ of __annotate__
#137842
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
Open
JelleZijlstra
wants to merge
7
commits into
python:main
Choose a base branch
from
JelleZijlstra:annotate-qualname
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+38
−1
Open
Changes from 3 commits
Commits
Show all changes
7 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
f29b8b9
gh-137814: Fix `__qualname__` of `__annotate__`
JelleZijlstra e6f1adf
fix bug and refleak
JelleZijlstra b4ae25b
Alternative approach
JelleZijlstra 3a50dbc
Revert "Alternative approach"
JelleZijlstra 81bdb7d
Merge branch 'main' into annotate-qualname
JelleZijlstra c70cf57
Merge branch 'main' into annotate-qualname
JelleZijlstra 7de447d
magic
JelleZijlstra File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Some comments aren't visible on the classic Files Changed page.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
2 changes: 2 additions & 0 deletions
2
Misc/NEWS.d/next/Core_and_Builtins/2025-08-15-21-33-16.gh-issue-137814.6yRTeu.rst
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ | ||
| Fix the ``__qualname__`` attribute of ``__annotate__`` functions on | ||
| functions. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
I was assuming that the ste_name of an annotations ste would be set to
__annotations__so you wouldn’t need to do this. Is that not possible?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.
Your previous comment suggested using the ste_name to store the name of the corresponding function instead. We can't do both.
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.
Can we set the ste_name to
funcname.__annotations__?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.
Then we'd end up with that in the
__name__of the function. I guess we could do that, but having a period in the__name__seems odd.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.
Ok, I'm not sure which option is best. I'll approve with whichever you choose.
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.
There are at least two options, the initial version of this PR (adding
ste_function_name) and the one I pushed earlier this morning after your comment (overloadingste_name). The advantage of theste_function_nameversion is that it's simpler: less code andste_namealways means the same thing. The advantage of the version that overloadsste_nameis that we save a little on memory usage: one fewer pointer in the symbol table struct.Personally I prefer the
ste_function_nameversion since it's simpler even if it uses slightly more memory during compilation, but if you prefer the other version, I'm OK with that.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.
I'm happy with the original version. Thank you for indulging my musings.