bpo-17013: Extend Mock.called to allow waiting for calls by Kentzo · Pull Request #17133 · python/cpython · GitHub

This implementation of bpo-17013 is alternative to #16094

Changes are based on my work for asynctest. Specifically on _AwaitEvent that was left out when related code was ported to CPython.

Key features:

Gives meaning to the existing Mock.called property, otherwise not much useful
Does not require end users to do anything: change is automatically available in every Mock
Utilizes existing semantics of python conditionals (both asyncio and threading)

Accepting this change will allow me to port _AwaitEvent therefore giving identical semantics to both wait-for-calls and wait-for-awaits.

I will provide necessary typing annotations for typeshed.

Considerations:

This approach changes type of the Mock.called property from bool to private bool-like _CallEvent. However, the only practical problem I could think of is if someone was checking type of Mock.called (e.g. via isinstance). That does not sound like a plausible problem: after all the property itself is seldom used with exception of conditional expressions where _CallEvent.__bool__ and _CallEvent.__eq__ is sufficient.
It probably makes sense to provide convenience methods like wait_for_call, but I would like to hear the opinion of the reviewers.

CC: @vstinner @tirkarthi @mariocj89

https://bugs.python.org/issue17013

Probably one method that the object should definitely have is wait_for_call(self, call, /, skip=0, timeout=None).

New methods allow tests to wait for calls executing in other threads.

Thanks @Kentzo for putting this through. From conversations with @voidspace, @lisroach, @tirkarthi and in the issue tracker it seems that people wanted to go with having a different mock just for this use case, rather than trying to fold it into the existing one. Similar to what was done with AsyncMock.

Happy to re-evaluate it, but I guess that should be a conversation in the issue tracker.

Closing this PR for now, as it looks like @mariocj89 will be putting in another PR to take over from this.

@cjw296 Hmm, where was that discussion?

https://bugs.python.org/issue17013#msg352211
#16094

Looks like @mariocj89 's PR actually predates this one, I don't have a strong opinion on either, so happy to re-open this PR if you, @mariocj89, @tirkarthi, @voidspace and @lisroach want to discuss which PR to take forward.

Hi @Kentzo, this was initially discussed in https://bugs.python.org/issue17013#msg352211 and offlne in the core dev sprints with @voidspace, @lisroach and @tirkarthi when we put forward the other PR. @voidspace preferred to go down the path of having specialized mocks rather than having a mock have all the functionality. Similar to the asyncmock.

At some point I was asked to move the discussion to bugs.python. For the benefit of the future developers I believe it makes sense to point out the benefits of the new "class approach" there as well.

At some point I was asked to move the discussion to bugs.python. For the benefit of the future developers I believe it makes sense to point out the benefits of the new "class approach" there as well.

Absolutely, that's why I suggested that. The issue lays on the availability of committer time though. It might be a busy time right now.

Added implementation of the wait_for_call convenience method that can be used like this:

mock.method_1.called.wait_for_call(call(1, a=1), timeout=0.01)

@Kentzo - it's unclear where you've added this?

I guess PR is not updated because it's closed. The corresponding branch in my repo got updated.

Any chance for this PR to get reviewed?

Doesn't look like I can re-open this PR, so please submit a new one if you want anything reviewed. Please comment here with a link to the new one.

@mariocj89 - where did you get to with your approach?

There is an open PR that was reviewed but never re-reviewed after proposed changes here: #16094

@cjw296 #20759

Just noticed that I put wrong link above 🤦🏻‍♂️, fixed the comment.

the-knights-who-say-ni added the CLA signed label Nov 12, 2019

bedevere-bot added the awaiting review label Nov 12, 2019

Kentzo mentioned this pull request Nov 13, 2019

Integrating with Python 3.8 Martiusweb/asynctest#144

Open

Kentzo force-pushed the bpo-17013 branch from 7c8ebff to eb981b4 Compare November 13, 2019 22:12

Kentzo requested review from 1st1 and asvetlov as code owners November 13, 2019 22:12

Kentzo force-pushed the bpo-17013 branch 2 times, most recently from 1c9de24 to fbe5422 Compare November 13, 2019 22:56

Kentzo force-pushed the bpo-17013 branch 3 times, most recently from 54b7b06 to c740cb8 Compare November 14, 2019 07:26

bpo-17013: Extend Mock.called to allow waiting for calls

eab4041

New methods allow tests to wait for calls executing in other threads.

Kentzo force-pushed the bpo-17013 branch from c740cb8 to eab4041 Compare November 14, 2019 16:56

cjw296 closed this Jan 24, 2020

Kentzo mentioned this pull request Apr 27, 2020

gh-61215: New mock to wait for multi-threaded events to happen #16094

Merged

pitrou mentioned this pull request Apr 10, 2022

Allow waiting on a mock #61215

Closed

bpo-17013: Extend Mock.called to allow waiting for calls by Kentzo · Pull Request #17133 · python/cpython · GitHub

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

bpo-17013: Extend Mock.called to allow waiting for calls - #17133

bpo-17013: Extend Mock.called to allow waiting for calls#17133Kentzo wants to merge 1 commit intopython:masterpython/cpython:masterfrom GreatFruitOmsk:bpo-17013GreatFruitOmsk/cpython:bpo-17013Copy head branch name to clipboard

Conversation

Kentzo commented Nov 12, 2019 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Kentzo commented Nov 13, 2019

Uh oh!

mariocj89 commented Nov 17, 2019

Uh oh!

cjw296 commented Jan 24, 2020

Uh oh!

Kentzo commented Jan 28, 2020

Uh oh!

cjw296 commented Jan 28, 2020

Uh oh!

mariocj89 commented Jan 28, 2020

Uh oh!

Kentzo commented Jan 29, 2020

Uh oh!

mariocj89 commented Jan 29, 2020

Uh oh!

Kentzo commented Apr 27, 2020

Uh oh!

cjw296 commented Apr 27, 2020

Uh oh!

Kentzo commented Apr 27, 2020

Uh oh!

Kentzo commented Jun 7, 2020

Uh oh!

cjw296 commented Jun 8, 2020

Uh oh!

mariocj89 commented Jun 9, 2020

Uh oh!

Kentzo commented Jun 9, 2020 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Kentzo commented Oct 21, 2020

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

bpo-17013: Extend Mock.called to allow waiting for calls#17133
Kentzo wants to merge 1 commit into
python:masterfrom
GreatFruitOmsk:bpo-17013

Kentzo commented Nov 12, 2019 •
edited
Loading

Kentzo commented Jun 9, 2020 •
edited
Loading