Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Use zero-argument super() #1726

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 2, 2023
Merged

Use zero-argument super() #1726

merged 3 commits into from
Nov 2, 2023

Commits on Nov 2, 2023

  1. Revise some comments and strings 

    These are a few things I had missed in gitpython-developers#1725.
    @EliahKagan
    EliahKagan committed Nov 2, 2023
    Configuration menu
    Copy the full SHA
    36a3b76 View commit details
    Browse the repository at this point in the history

  2. Use zero-argument super() where applicable 

    This replaces 2-argument super(...) calls with zero-argument
super() calls, where doing so preserves the exact semantics. This
turns out to be everywhere in the actual code (now all uses of the
super builtin are calls to it with zero arguments), and also in
most places code was discussed in comments.

The single exception, occurring in comments (technically a string
literal, but being used as a comment), appears in
git.objects.util.TraversableIterableObj, where super(Commit, self),
rather than super(TraversableIterableObj, self) which would have
the same meaning as super(), is shown. It may be that this should
be changed, but such a revision would not signify identical
semantics, and may require other changes to preserve or recover
clarity or documentary accuracy.
    @EliahKagan
    EliahKagan committed Nov 2, 2023
    Configuration menu
    Copy the full SHA
    a47e46d View commit details
    Browse the repository at this point in the history

  3. Don't swallow AttributeError from super().setUp() 

    This is conceptually independent of the immediately preceding
super() call refactoring, but serves the same goal of simplifying
and clarifying super() calls.

In test.performance.lib, the TestBigRepoR and TestBigRepoRW
classes' setUp methods had calls to setUp through super proxies,
which were wrapped in try-blocks to swallow AttributeError
exceptions. This removes that, relying on the presence of setUp
methods in some parent or sibling class in the MRO.

The intent appeared to be solely to account for the possibility
that no class in the MRO would define a setUp method. However,
the unittest.TestCase base class defines noop setUp and tearDown
methods to ensure this does not have to be done.

This may also make the code more robust, because the form in which
AttributeError was being swallowed was:

    try:
        super().setUp()
    except AttributeError:
        pass

But that has the disadvantage of also catching AttributeError due
to a bug or other problem in code that runs *in* an ancestor or
sibling class's existing setUp method. This could alternatively
be addressed by using:

    try:
        other_setUp = super().setUp
    except AttributeError:
        pass
    else:
        other_setUp()

However, because unittest.TestCase provides empty setUp and
tearDown methods to allow such special-casing to be avoided (both
in cases like this and for the test runner), this isn't needed.
    @EliahKagan
    EliahKagan committed Nov 2, 2023
    Configuration menu
    Copy the full SHA
    9113177 View commit details
    Browse the repository at this point in the history