gh-109219: propagate free vars through type param scopes #109377

carljm · 2023-09-13T15:41:17Z

When an annotation scope is inside a class scope, unbound name references in the annotation scope that are bound in the enclosing class scope and would otherwise be free variables are overridden (in analyze_name) to use GLOBAL_EXPLICIT or GLOBAL_IMPLICIT scope instead, since they should behave like name references in the class scope, which see only the class-scope and globals, not other enclosing scopes. E.g. in this example, the reference to T in D's bases (which is in a nested annotation scope, since D is generic) should have GLOBAL_IMPLICIT scope, which results in it using LOAD_FROM_DICT_OR_GLOBALS (where the dict is the class namespace); just as if it were a reference directly in C's scope:

def f():
    T = str
    class C:
        T = int
        class D[U](T):
            pass

But in the case where the same name is also free in a child scope of the annotation scope (replace pass with T in the above example), it must be included in the free vars of the annotation scope, so that the child scope has access to the cell when its closure is constructed.

The symbol flag DEF_CLASS_FREE is intended for these class-scope cases, where a name must have a scope other than FREE in order for references to it to behave correctly, but must still be included in freevars because it is free in a child scope.

So we must add DEF_CLASS_FREE to such names not only in class scopes, but also in annotation scopes enclosed by class scopes.

Previously, we only added DEF_CLASS_FREE if the name was bound in the class scope; otherwise, it would be FREE anyway and DEF_CLASS_FREE would be redundant. To preserve this check in annotation scope cases, we'd have to check if the name is bound in the enclosing class scope, not the annotation scope. But this check is unnecessary, since a redundant DEF_CLASS_FREE on a FREE name is harmless; either way the name will be added to freevars, and this is the only impact of DEF_CLASS_FREE. So it's simpler to just remove the check.

Issue: SystemError for pep695 type parameter with the same name as the inner class #109219

JelleZijlstra

Thanks! I'm happy the fix may be this simple.

I'll spend some more time later today coming up with more test cases.

Python/symtable.c

Co-authored-by: Jelle Zijlstra <[email protected]>

JelleZijlstra · 2023-09-14T16:06:19Z

The failing test is some concurrent.futures thing on FreeBSD, not relevant to this bug.

miss-islington · 2023-09-14T16:20:35Z

Thanks @carljm for the PR 🌮🎉.. I'm working now to backport this PR to: 3.12.
🐍🍒⛏🤖 I'm not a witch! I'm not a witch!

…nGH-109377) (cherry picked from commit 909adb5) Co-authored-by: Carl Meyer <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Jelle Zijlstra <[email protected]>

bedevere-app · 2023-09-14T16:20:47Z

GH-109410 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.12 branch.

bedevere-bot · 2023-09-14T17:17:15Z

⚠️⚠️⚠️ Buildbot failure ⚠️⚠️⚠️

Hi! The buildbot s390x RHEL7 LTO 3.x has failed when building commit 909adb5.

What do you need to do:

Don't panic.
Check the buildbot page in the devguide if you don't know what the buildbots are or how they work.
Go to the page of the buildbot that failed (https://buildbot.python.org/all/#builders/402/builds/5393) and take a look at the build logs.
Check if the failure is related to this commit (909adb5) or if it is a false positive.
If the failure is related to this commit, please, reflect that on the issue and make a new Pull Request with a fix.

You can take a look at the buildbot page here:

https://buildbot.python.org/all/#builders/402/builds/5393

Failed tests:

test.test_asyncio.test_subprocess
test_tools

Failed subtests:

test_freeze_simple_script - test.test_tools.test_freeze.TestFreeze.test_freeze_simple_script
test_subprocess_consistent_callbacks - test.test_asyncio.test_subprocess.SubprocessThreadedWatcherTests.test_subprocess_consistent_callbacks

Summary of the results of the build (if available):

==

Click to see traceback logs

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/dje/cpython-buildarea/3.x.edelsohn-rhel-z.lto/build/Lib/test/test_tools/test_freeze.py", line 28, in test_freeze_simple_script
    outdir, scriptfile, python = helper.prepare(script, outdir)
                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/dje/cpython-buildarea/3.x.edelsohn-rhel-z.lto/build/Tools/freeze/test/freeze.py", line 146, in prepare
    copy_source_tree(srcdir, SRCDIR)
  File "/home/dje/cpython-buildarea/3.x.edelsohn-rhel-z.lto/build/Tools/freeze/test/freeze.py", line 95, in copy_source_tree
    shutil.copytree(oldroot, newroot, ignore=ignore_non_src)
  File "/home/dje/cpython-buildarea/3.x.edelsohn-rhel-z.lto/build/Lib/shutil.py", line 588, in copytree
    return _copytree(entries=entries, src=src, dst=dst, symlinks=symlinks,
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/dje/cpython-buildarea/3.x.edelsohn-rhel-z.lto/build/Lib/shutil.py", line 542, in _copytree
    raise Error(errors)
shutil.Error: [('/home/dje/cpython-buildarea/3.x.edelsohn-rhel-z.lto/build/build/test_python_65020æ/@test_65020_tmpæ-tardir/extractall_ctrl/ustar/fifotype', '/tmp/test_python_sn8obp9f/tmpj5vtdkcr/cpython/build/test_python_65020æ/@test_65020_tmpæ-tardir/extractall_ctrl/ustar/fifotype', '`/home/dje/cpython-buildarea/3.x.edelsohn-rhel-z.lto/build/build/test_python_65020æ/@test_65020_tmpæ-tardir/extractall_ctrl/ustar/fifotype` is a named pipe'), ('/home/dje/cpython-buildarea/3.x.edelsohn-rhel-z.lto/build/build/test_python_65020æ/@test_65020_tmpæ-tardir/extractall_none/ustar/fifotype', '/tmp/test_python_sn8obp9f/tmpj5vtdkcr/cpython/build/test_python_65020æ/@test_65020_tmpæ-tardir/extractall_none/ustar/fifotype', '`/home/dje/cpython-buildarea/3.x.edelsohn-rhel-z.lto/build/build/test_python_65020æ/@test_65020_tmpæ-tardir/extractall_none/ustar/fifotype` is a named pipe')]


Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/dje/cpython-buildarea/3.x.edelsohn-rhel-z.lto/build/Lib/test/test_asyncio/test_subprocess.py", line 788, in test_subprocess_consistent_callbacks
    self.loop.run_until_complete(main())
  File "/home/dje/cpython-buildarea/3.x.edelsohn-rhel-z.lto/build/Lib/asyncio/base_events.py", line 664, in run_until_complete
    return future.result()
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/dje/cpython-buildarea/3.x.edelsohn-rhel-z.lto/build/Lib/test/test_asyncio/test_subprocess.py", line 780, in main
    self.assertEqual(events, [
AssertionError: Lists differ: [('pi[29 chars]t'), 'pipe_connection_lost', ('pipe_data_recei[57 chars]ted'] != [('pi[29 chars]t'), ('pipe_data_received', 2, b'stderr'), 'pi[57 chars]ted']

bedevere-bot · 2023-09-14T17:22:19Z

⚠️⚠️⚠️ Buildbot failure ⚠️⚠️⚠️

Hi! The buildbot AMD64 Debian root 3.x has failed when building commit 909adb5.

What do you need to do:

Don't panic.
Check the buildbot page in the devguide if you don't know what the buildbots are or how they work.
Go to the page of the buildbot that failed (https://buildbot.python.org/all/#builders/345/builds/5838) and take a look at the build logs.
Check if the failure is related to this commit (909adb5) or if it is a false positive.
If the failure is related to this commit, please, reflect that on the issue and make a new Pull Request with a fix.

You can take a look at the buildbot page here:

https://buildbot.python.org/all/#builders/345/builds/5838

Failed tests:

test.test_multiprocessing_spawn.test_processes

Summary of the results of the build (if available):

==

Click to see traceback logs

remote: Enumerating objects: 22, done.        
remote: Counting objects:   4% (1/22)        
remote: Counting objects:   9% (2/22)        
remote: Counting objects:  13% (3/22)        
remote: Counting objects:  18% (4/22)        
remote: Counting objects:  22% (5/22)        
remote: Counting objects:  27% (6/22)        
remote: Counting objects:  31% (7/22)        
remote: Counting objects:  36% (8/22)        
remote: Counting objects:  40% (9/22)        
remote: Counting objects:  45% (10/22)        
remote: Counting objects:  50% (11/22)        
remote: Counting objects:  54% (12/22)        
remote: Counting objects:  59% (13/22)        
remote: Counting objects:  63% (14/22)        
remote: Counting objects:  68% (15/22)        
remote: Counting objects:  72% (16/22)        
remote: Counting objects:  77% (17/22)        
remote: Counting objects:  81% (18/22)        
remote: Counting objects:  86% (19/22)        
remote: Counting objects:  90% (20/22)        
remote: Counting objects:  95% (21/22)        
remote: Counting objects: 100% (22/22)        
remote: Counting objects: 100% (22/22), done.        
remote: Compressing objects:   8% (1/12)        
remote: Compressing objects:  16% (2/12)        
remote: Compressing objects:  25% (3/12)        
remote: Compressing objects:  33% (4/12)        
remote: Compressing objects:  41% (5/12)        
remote: Compressing objects:  50% (6/12)        
remote: Compressing objects:  58% (7/12)        
remote: Compressing objects:  66% (8/12)        
remote: Compressing objects:  75% (9/12)        
remote: Compressing objects:  83% (10/12)        
remote: Compressing objects:  91% (11/12)        
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (12/12)        
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (12/12), done.        
remote: Total 12 (delta 10), reused 1 (delta 0), pack-reused 0        
From https://github.com/python/cpython
 * branch                  main       -> FETCH_HEAD
Note: switching to '909adb5092c0ae9426814742d97932204b211cfb'.

You are in 'detached HEAD' state. You can look around, make experimental
changes and commit them, and you can discard any commits you make in this
state without impacting any branches by switching back to a branch.

If you want to create a new branch to retain commits you create, you may
do so (now or later) by using -c with the switch command. Example:

  git switch -c <new-branch-name>

Or undo this operation with:

  git switch -

Turn off this advice by setting config variable advice.detachedHead to false

HEAD is now at 909adb5092 gh-109219: propagate free vars through type param scopes (#109377)
Switched to and reset branch 'main'

configure: WARNING: pkg-config is missing. Some dependencies may not be detected correctly.

Kill <WorkerThread #1 running test=test_tools pid=1565972 time=3 min 34 sec> process group
Warning -- Failed to join <WorkerThread #1 running test=test_tools pid=1565972 time=4 min 4 sec> in 30.2 sec
make: *** [Makefile:2029: buildbottest] Error 5

bedevere-bot · 2023-09-14T17:33:33Z

⚠️⚠️⚠️ Buildbot failure ⚠️⚠️⚠️

Hi! The buildbot s390x RHEL8 LTO + PGO 3.x has failed when building commit 909adb5.

What do you need to do:

Don't panic.
Check the buildbot page in the devguide if you don't know what the buildbots are or how they work.
Go to the page of the buildbot that failed (https://buildbot.python.org/all/#builders/442/builds/4975) and take a look at the build logs.
Check if the failure is related to this commit (909adb5) or if it is a false positive.
If the failure is related to this commit, please, reflect that on the issue and make a new Pull Request with a fix.

You can take a look at the buildbot page here:

https://buildbot.python.org/all/#builders/442/builds/4975

Failed tests:

test.test_asyncio.test_subprocess

Failed subtests:

test_subprocess_consistent_callbacks - test.test_asyncio.test_subprocess.SubprocessThreadedWatcherTests.test_subprocess_consistent_callbacks
test_subprocess_consistent_callbacks - test.test_asyncio.test_subprocess.SubprocessFastWatcherTests.test_subprocess_consistent_callbacks

Summary of the results of the build (if available):

==

Click to see traceback logs

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/dje/cpython-buildarea/3.x.edelsohn-rhel8-z.lto-pgo/build/Lib/test/test_asyncio/test_subprocess.py", line 788, in test_subprocess_consistent_callbacks
    self.loop.run_until_complete(main())
  File "/home/dje/cpython-buildarea/3.x.edelsohn-rhel8-z.lto-pgo/build/Lib/asyncio/base_events.py", line 664, in run_until_complete
    return future.result()
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/dje/cpython-buildarea/3.x.edelsohn-rhel8-z.lto-pgo/build/Lib/test/test_asyncio/test_subprocess.py", line 780, in main
    self.assertEqual(events, [
AssertionError: Lists differ: [('pi[29 chars]t'), 'process_exited'] != [('pi[29 chars]t'), ('pipe_data_received', 2, b'stderr'), 'pi[57 chars]ted']


Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/dje/cpython-buildarea/3.x.edelsohn-rhel8-z.lto-pgo/build/Lib/test/test_asyncio/test_subprocess.py", line 788, in test_subprocess_consistent_callbacks
    self.loop.run_until_complete(main())
  File "/home/dje/cpython-buildarea/3.x.edelsohn-rhel8-z.lto-pgo/build/Lib/asyncio/base_events.py", line 664, in run_until_complete
    return future.result()
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/dje/cpython-buildarea/3.x.edelsohn-rhel8-z.lto-pgo/build/Lib/test/test_asyncio/test_subprocess.py", line 780, in main
    self.assertEqual(events, [
AssertionError: Lists differ: ['process_exited', ('pipe_data_received', 1, b'stdout')] != [('pipe_data_received', 1, b'stdout'), ('p[95 chars]ted']

bedevere-bot · 2023-09-14T19:22:44Z

⚠️⚠️⚠️ Buildbot failure ⚠️⚠️⚠️

Hi! The buildbot PPC64LE RHEL8 LTO 3.x has failed when building commit 909adb5.

What do you need to do:

Don't panic.
Check the buildbot page in the devguide if you don't know what the buildbots are or how they work.
Go to the page of the buildbot that failed (https://buildbot.python.org/all/#builders/361/builds/4053) and take a look at the build logs.
Check if the failure is related to this commit (909adb5) or if it is a false positive.
If the failure is related to this commit, please, reflect that on the issue and make a new Pull Request with a fix.

You can take a look at the buildbot page here:

https://buildbot.python.org/all/#builders/361/builds/4053

Failed tests:

test.test_asyncio.test_unix_events

Failed subtests:

test_fork_signal_handling - test.test_asyncio.test_unix_events.TestFork.test_fork_signal_handling

Summary of the results of the build (if available):

==

Click to see traceback logs

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/home/buildbot/buildarea/3.x.cstratak-RHEL8-ppc64le.lto/build/Lib/unittest/async_case.py", line 90, in _callTestMethod
    if self._callMaybeAsync(method) is not None:
       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/buildbot/buildarea/3.x.cstratak-RHEL8-ppc64le.lto/build/Lib/unittest/async_case.py", line 117, in _callMaybeAsync
    return self._asyncioTestContext.run(func, *args, **kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/buildbot/buildarea/3.x.cstratak-RHEL8-ppc64le.lto/build/Lib/test/support/hashlib_helper.py", line 49, in wrapper
    return func_or_class(*args, **kwargs)
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  File "/home/buildbot/buildarea/3.x.cstratak-RHEL8-ppc64le.lto/build/Lib/test/test_asyncio/test_unix_events.py", line 1937, in test_fork_signal_handling
    self.assertTrue(child_handled.is_set())
AssertionError: False is not true

JelleZijlstra · 2023-09-14T19:23:38Z

You're breaking a lot of buildbots today Carl :)

carljm · 2023-09-14T20:04:56Z

It's especially impressive how many I managed to break by landing a change in code under #if 0!

…09377) (#109410) gh-109219: propagate free vars through type param scopes (GH-109377) (cherry picked from commit 909adb5) Co-authored-by: Carl Meyer <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Jelle Zijlstra <[email protected]>

pythongh-109219: propagate used free vars through type param scopes

8ff3f71

bedevere-app bot mentioned this pull request Sep 13, 2023

SystemError for pep695 type parameter with the same name as the inner class #109219

Closed

add news entry

7b8f09a

JelleZijlstra reviewed Sep 13, 2023

View reviewed changes

Python/symtable.c Show resolved Hide resolved

move test case to a better spot

1f7fa3b

JelleZijlstra reviewed Sep 14, 2023

View reviewed changes

Python/symtable.c Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Update Python/symtable.c

ce7d876

Co-authored-by: Jelle Zijlstra <[email protected]>

carljm mentioned this pull request Sep 14, 2023

gh-109219: propagate used free vars through type param scopes [v2] #109389

Closed

carljm marked this pull request as ready for review September 14, 2023 14:08

bedevere-app bot added the awaiting review label Sep 14, 2023

carljm requested a review from JelleZijlstra September 14, 2023 14:50

carljm changed the title ~~gh-109219: propagate used free vars through type param scopes~~ gh-109219: propagate free vars through type param scopes Sep 14, 2023

JelleZijlstra approved these changes Sep 14, 2023

View reviewed changes

bedevere-app bot added awaiting core review and removed awaiting review labels Sep 14, 2023

carljm added the needs backport to 3.12 only security fixes label Sep 14, 2023

carljm merged commit 909adb5 into python:main Sep 14, 2023

bedevere-app bot removed the awaiting core review label Sep 14, 2023

carljm deleted the 695bug branch September 14, 2023 16:20

bedevere-app bot removed the needs backport to 3.12 only security fixes label Sep 14, 2023

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

gh-109219: propagate free vars through type param scopes #109377

gh-109219: propagate free vars through type param scopes #109377

Uh oh!

carljm commented Sep 13, 2023 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

JelleZijlstra left a comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

JelleZijlstra commented Sep 14, 2023

Uh oh!

miss-islington commented Sep 14, 2023

Uh oh!

bedevere-app bot commented Sep 14, 2023

Uh oh!

bedevere-bot commented Sep 14, 2023

Uh oh!

bedevere-bot commented Sep 14, 2023

Uh oh!

bedevere-bot commented Sep 14, 2023

Uh oh!

bedevere-bot commented Sep 14, 2023

Uh oh!

JelleZijlstra commented Sep 14, 2023

Uh oh!

carljm commented Sep 14, 2023

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

Uh oh!

gh-109219: propagate free vars through type param scopes #109377

gh-109219: propagate free vars through type param scopes #109377

Uh oh!

Conversation

carljm commented Sep 13, 2023 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

JelleZijlstra left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

JelleZijlstra commented Sep 14, 2023

Uh oh!

miss-islington commented Sep 14, 2023

Uh oh!

bedevere-app bot commented Sep 14, 2023

Uh oh!

bedevere-bot commented Sep 14, 2023

⚠️⚠️⚠️ Buildbot failure ⚠️⚠️⚠️

Uh oh!

bedevere-bot commented Sep 14, 2023

⚠️⚠️⚠️ Buildbot failure ⚠️⚠️⚠️

Uh oh!

bedevere-bot commented Sep 14, 2023

⚠️⚠️⚠️ Buildbot failure ⚠️⚠️⚠️

Uh oh!

bedevere-bot commented Sep 14, 2023

⚠️⚠️⚠️ Buildbot failure ⚠️⚠️⚠️

Uh oh!

JelleZijlstra commented Sep 14, 2023

Uh oh!

carljm commented Sep 14, 2023

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

carljm commented Sep 13, 2023 •

edited

Loading