Skip to content

Conversation

@guan404ming
Copy link
Member

Why

Python's built-in list and dict return False when empty. However, Array and Map containers always returned True because they didn't implement bool, making bool(Array([])) and bool(Map({})) return True unexpectedly.

How

  • Python: Implemented bool for Array and Map returning len(self) > 0
  • Tests: Added parametrized tests verifying truthy/falsy behavior for empty and non-empty containers

@gemini-code-assist
Copy link
Contributor

Summary of Changes

Hello @guan404ming, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request addresses an inconsistency in the boolean evaluation of custom Array and Map container types. By implementing the __bool__ special method for these classes, it ensures that empty instances now correctly evaluate to False, mirroring the behavior of Python's built-in list and dict types. This change improves the predictability and consistency of these custom containers within conditional logic.

Highlights

  • Boolean Evaluation for Array: The __bool__ method has been implemented for the Array class, ensuring that an empty Array now correctly evaluates to False in a boolean context, aligning with Python's native list behavior.
  • Boolean Evaluation for Map: The __bool__ method has been implemented for the Map class, ensuring that an empty Map now correctly evaluates to False in a boolean context, aligning with Python's native dictionary behavior.
  • New Test Cases: Parameterized tests (test_array_bool and test_map_bool) have been added to verify the correct truthy/falsy behavior for both empty and non-empty Array and Map containers.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution.

Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code Review

This pull request correctly implements __bool__ for Array and Map containers to align their behavior with standard Python collections, along with adding appropriate tests. My review identifies a potential robustness issue: the new methods could cause a crash when used on objects that failed initialization and have a null C handle. I've provided suggestions to add safety checks to prevent null pointer dereferences, making the implementation more robust.

@guan404ming guan404ming marked this pull request as ready for review January 4, 2026 16:49
Copy link
Member

@junrushao junrushao left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Very cool addition! Just some minor nits


def __bool__(self) -> bool:
"""Return True if the array is non-empty."""
return self.__chandle__() != 0 and len(self) > 0
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think there's a need to check __chandle__()

Suggested change
return self.__chandle__() != 0 and len(self) > 0
return len(self) > 0

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sure, I've removed it. Thanks!


def __bool__(self) -> bool:
"""Return True if the map is non-empty."""
return self.__chandle__() != 0 and len(self) > 0
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ditto

@guan404ming guan404ming force-pushed the feat/container-bool-support branch from 05d2114 to e31414d Compare January 5, 2026 04:35
@junrushao junrushao merged commit 46ab644 into apache:main Jan 5, 2026
14 checks passed
@guan404ming guan404ming deleted the feat/container-bool-support branch January 5, 2026 11:18
@guan404ming
Copy link
Member Author

Thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants