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

Make _CountingAttr empty metadata unique #280

Merged
merged 9 commits into from Dec 19, 2017

Conversation

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@altendky
Contributor

altendky commented Oct 30, 2017

Issue #278

@codecov

This comment has been minimized.

codecov bot commented Oct 30, 2017

Codecov Report

Merging #280 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 100%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@          Coverage Diff          @@
##           master   #280   +/-   ##
=====================================
  Coverage     100%   100%           
=====================================
  Files           9      9           
  Lines         729    731    +2     
  Branches      151    152    +1     
=====================================
+ Hits          729    731    +2
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/attr/_make.py 100% <100%> (ø) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 5ed8c4a...6be39c2. Read the comment docs.

@altendky

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

altendky commented Oct 30, 2017

No coverage for non-default metadata? Hmm. Locally metadata is mostly None at the point of the partially covered if metadata is None: but many times it is not None so I'm not sure I understand this correctly. Guidance would be appreciated.

Note that this is my first Hypothesis test and while my change to the bare_attrs makes sense to me it does seem fishy that I would need to modify that. If there's another way to get independent instances of _CounterAttr or if we want to leave existing as is and just do what I did only for the new test, let me know.

Also, I am not sure if this belongs in any docs or changelog. It seems a bit behind the scenes but not completely.

@hynek

This comment has been minimized.

Member

hynek commented Oct 31, 2017

@Tinche this is yours

@Tinche

This comment has been minimized.

Member

Tinche commented Nov 1, 2017

Sure, I'll take this when I'm feeling a little better.

@hynek

This comment has been minimized.

Member

hynek commented Nov 1, 2017

Sure no rush, this is not a blocker.

@altendky

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

altendky commented Nov 1, 2017

@Tinche No urgency for me. I've got my simple workaround in place. I hope you get better soon.

@Tinche

This comment has been minimized.

Member

Tinche commented Nov 16, 2017

Rebase please and I will review.

@altendky

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

altendky commented Nov 17, 2017

Updated, but all the caveats from #280 (comment) still apply. I'd love to understand the coverage issue.

@Tinche

I'm not sure what's going on with the coverage data.

@@ -145,7 +145,7 @@ def ordereddict_of_class(tup):
attrs_and_classes.map(ordereddict_of_class))
bare_attrs = st.just(attr.ib(default=None))
bare_attrs = st.none().map(lambda _: attr.ib(default=None))

This comment has been minimized.

@Tinche

Tinche Nov 17, 2017

Member

Can you try using builds(lambda: attr.ib(default=None)), I think it's cleaner than mapping over none().

@@ -142,6 +142,8 @@ def attrib(default=NOTHING, validator=None,
raise TypeError(
"Invalid value for hash. Must be True, False, or None."
)
if metadata is None:

This comment has been minimized.

@Tinche

Tinche Nov 17, 2017

Member

Coverage is reporting this line as a partial hit, but it's obviously not.

@altendky

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

altendky commented Nov 21, 2017

@Tinche switched to bare_attrs = st.builds(attr.ib, default=st.none())

@Tinche

This comment has been minimized.

Member

Tinche commented Nov 22, 2017

I'm OK with this PR as it stand except I'd like to get to the bottom of the coverage issue. @hynek any ideas?

@altendky

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

altendky commented Nov 23, 2017

If you don't know I'll see what I can find. Probably not for a couple days though. Thanks for keeping up on this.

@hynek

This comment has been minimized.

Member

hynek commented Nov 23, 2017

So this is interesting.

If I do the famous XXX test:

    if metadata is None:
        XXX
        metadata = {}

it fails already in hypothesis. If I invent an else, it fails in our test suite:

    if metadata is None:
        metadata = {}
    else:
        XXX

Therefore, if I add this test:

def test_meta():
    y = attr.ib(metadata={})

we get 100% test coverage.

IOW we don’t appear to have a test that sets metadata to something which seems like a glaring omission.

@Tinche

This comment has been minimized.

Member

Tinche commented Nov 23, 2017

Hypothesis will generate attributes with arbitrary metadata in some tests. We probably never assert the metadata is the thing we set it to, though.

@altendky

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

altendky commented Nov 23, 2017

One of the first things I did was to print metadata and run the tests. It mostly printed None but many times printed a thing. I can't swear I printed the repr(), but I normally do. I'm away from my computer for a day or I'd try again. I also recall seeing 100% coverage reported locally.

@hynek, did you get less than 100% coverage when running locally?

@hynek

This comment has been minimized.

Member

hynek commented Nov 24, 2017

Yes I had less than 100% until I added the test I mentioned which lifted it to 100%.

@Tinche

Ok, just stick the test somewhere so we have 100% coverage again and I'm good with this. Also I think we need a changelog entry for this, even though this isn't a public thing we're changing? Can't hurt to add one.

@altendky

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

altendky commented Nov 27, 2017

I added some prints and confirmed that both sides of the if are being hit. If we look down at a run without disabling capture we see that under py36 runtests: commands[0] | coverage run --parallel -m pytest we do in fact only ever see metadata is None getting hit.

It sort of looks like coverage is not being measured during the full test run but only on that commands[0] line. Is there anything related to this that was intentional? I still have to learn a bit about coverage/tox/pytest to understand how these systems work.

I hope you don't mind me digging into this a bit more. The way I read all this is that the tests would cover metadata is None both ways but something about how we are running it, or just a coverage bug, is keeping it from being measured.

@hynek hynek added this to the 17.4 milestone Dec 16, 2017

@altendky

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

altendky commented Dec 18, 2017

I added both a 'real' test that sure seems like it should achieve coverage (beyond all the other indications we should have had full coverage already) and also a 'force coverage' test that actually manages to achieve full reported coverage.

I have taken several passes at this without managing to identify the actual issue. Perhaps it relates in some way to HypothesisWorks/hypothesis#997? Though I tried the various mentioned workarounds there including HypothesisWorks/hypothesis#1031 without any effect. The only relationship I see is that hypothesis tests don't seem to consistently have coverage reported appropriately. Are you concerned enough to open a new ticket about this coverage funny business?

This gist shows the coverage loss when the coverage forcing test is removed.

@Tinche, was there anything else you had wanted changed? I added the news fragment and the coverage report doesn't complain anymore.

@Tinche

Tinche approved these changes Dec 18, 2017

@Tinche

This comment has been minimized.

Member

Tinche commented Dec 18, 2017

@hynek please take a last look and do the honors. :)

metadata = draw(st.dictionaries(keys=keys, values=vals))
metadata = draw(st.dictionaries(
keys=keys, values=vals, min_size=1, max_size=5))
print('metadata', metadata)

This comment has been minimized.

@altendky

altendky Dec 19, 2017

Contributor

Well, that wasn't supposed to be left in there...

@hynek hynek merged commit 1addd35 into python-attrs:master Dec 19, 2017

3 checks passed

codecov/patch 100% of diff hit (target 100%)
Details
codecov/project 100% (+0%) compared to 5ed8c4a
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
@hynek

This comment has been minimized.

Member

hynek commented Dec 19, 2017

Thanks and welcome to software hell. ;)

@altendky

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

altendky commented Dec 19, 2017

@hynek, yeah, so it goes. I made a sample showing that code called from strategies does not get coverage recorded. From a discussion in #hypothesis, apparently this is expected behavior. It changed at release 3.29.0 in September. Actually, the first commit or two after 3.28.3 (HypothesisWorks/hypothesis@6e7a478 HypothesisWorks/hypothesis@d75ac34). The recommendation was to not rely on strategies for coverage. One approach would be to use the strategy to provide the attrib() parameters and then do the actual attrib() call inside the test function. Maybe via a decorator instead?

In case you can't tell, I just hate sticking stuff in to cover up systems that aren't working as expected (well, at least as I expected :]). Should I open a ticket to track this? Or just drop it...

@altendky

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

altendky commented Dec 19, 2017

Apparently it may just be a performance thing and could be open to discussion. If you don't want to just drop it. Using @example was also brought up but the guess was that it may not be appropriate for the attrs case.

@hynek

This comment has been minimized.

Member

hynek commented Dec 20, 2017

I actually welcome that feature! I was always a bit…nervous about relying on hypothesis for coverage because it’s kind of a matter of luck that it hits them all.

I’ll just rewrite the test myself, don’t worry about it.

hynek added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 20, 2017

Fix metadata test
We now understand the nature of it:
#280 (comment)

ref #280
@altendky

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

altendky commented Dec 20, 2017

This only seems to partially address any concerns about inconsistent coverage from using hypothesis. The test body that runs would be just as inconsistent about coverage as the construction in the strategies, I would think.

As opposed to a little change like that, I was thinking more that a large portion of the test suite may be based on the expectation that strategies provided coverage and might need to be reconsidered (even though we do have 100% coverage presently). I figured it was the developers responsibility to pick strategies such that coverage would be achieved. In this case being sure to explicitly use both simple_attrs_with_metadata and simple_attrs_without_metadata.

I went ahead and made a small example adjustment to try out the idea of having strategies only generate parameters and the test itself generate the attr.ib().

altendky@da4512b

If there is desire to simply not use hypothesis for coverage then it seems like there should perhaps be complete isolation with no coverage for hypothesis tests and separate tests which are the sole contributors to coverage. It seems that otherwise the uncertainty would remain.

@hynek

This comment has been minimized.

Member

hynek commented Dec 21, 2017

scratches head

That’s some heavy shit to do just on the side man. :)

Generally speaking, I would like to streamline our hypothesis use (the test suite could be really faster) so I’m open to improvements (although they’ll have to pass @Tinche’s discerning eye :)).

So I would suggest to open a new issue and sum up your ideas & findings from here, thanks.

bors-fusion bot added a commit to fusionapp/documint that referenced this pull request Jan 1, 2018

Merge #124
124: Scheduled weekly dependency update for week 00 r=mithrandi a=pyup-bot




## Updates
Here's a list of all the updates bundled in this pull request. I've added some links to make it easier for you to find all the information you need.
<table align="center">

<tr>
<td><b>asn1crypto</b></td>
<td align="center">0.23.0</td>
<td align="center">&raquo;</td>
<td align="center">0.24.0</td>
<td>
     <a href="https://pypi.python.org/pypi/asn1crypto">PyPI</a> | <a href="https://pyup.io/changelogs/asn1crypto/">Changelog</a> | <a href="https://github.com/wbond/asn1crypto/issues">Repo</a> 

</td>

<tr>
<td><b>attrs</b></td>
<td align="center">17.3.0</td>
<td align="center">&raquo;</td>
<td align="center">17.4.0</td>
<td>
     <a href="https://pypi.python.org/pypi/attrs">PyPI</a> | <a href="https://pyup.io/changelogs/attrs/">Changelog</a> | <a href="http://www.attrs.org/">Homepage</a> 

</td>

<tr>
<td><b>ipaddress</b></td>
<td align="center">1.0.18</td>
<td align="center">&raquo;</td>
<td align="center">1.0.19</td>
<td>
     <a href="https://pypi.python.org/pypi/ipaddress">PyPI</a> | <a href="https://github.com/phihag/ipaddress">Repo</a> 

</td>

</tr>
</table>



## Changelogs


### asn1crypto 0.23.0 -> 0.24.0

>### 0.24.0


> - `x509.Certificate().self_signed` will no longer return `&quot;yes&quot;` under any
>   circumstances. This helps prevent confusion since the library does not
>   verify the signature. Instead a library like oscrypto should be used
>   to confirm if a certificate is self-signed.
> - Added various OIDs to `x509.KeyPurposeId()`
> - Added `x509.Certificate().private_key_usage_period_value`
> - Added structures for parsing common subject directory attributes for
>   X.509 certificates, including `x509.SubjectDirectoryAttribute()`
> - Added `algos.AnyAlgorithmIdentifier()` for situations where an
>   algorithm identifier may contain a digest, signed digest or encryption
>   algorithm OID
> - Fixed a bug with `x509.Certificate().subject_directory_attributes_value`
>   not returning the correct value
> - Fixed a bug where explicitly-tagged fields in a `core.Sequence()` would
>   not function properly when the field had a default value
> - Fixed a bug with type checking in `pem.armor()`







### attrs 17.3.0 -> 17.4.0

>### 17.4.0

>-------------------

>Backward-incompatible Changes
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>- The traversal of MROs when using multiple inheritance was backward:
>  If you defined a class ``C`` that subclasses ``A`` and ``B`` like ``C(A, B)``, ``attrs`` would have collected the attributes from ``B`` *before* those of ``A``.

>  This is now fixed and means that in classes that employ multiple inheritance, the output of ``__repr__`` and the order of positional arguments in ``__init__`` changes.
>  Due to the nature of this bug, a proper deprecation cycle was unfortunately impossible.

>  Generally speaking, it&#39;s advisable to prefer ``kwargs``-based initialization anyways – *especially* if you employ multiple inheritance and diamond-shaped hierarchies.

>  `298 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/298&gt;`_,
>  `299 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/299&gt;`_,
>  `304 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/304&gt;`_
>- The ``__repr__`` set by ``attrs``
>  no longer produces an ``AttributeError``
>  when the instance is missing some of the specified attributes
>  (either through deleting
>  or after using ``init=False`` on some attributes).

>  This can break code
>  that relied on ``repr(attr_cls_instance)`` raising ``AttributeError``
>  to check if any attr-specified members were unset.

>  If you were using this,
>  you can implement a custom method for checking this::

>      def has_unset_members(self):
>          for field in attr.fields(type(self)):
>              try:
>                  getattr(self, field.name)
>              except AttributeError:
>                  return True
>          return False

>  `308 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/308&gt;`_


>Deprecations
>^^^^^^^^^^^^

>- The ``attr.ib(convert=callable)`` option is now deprecated in favor of ``attr.ib(converter=callable)``.

>  This is done to achieve consistency with other noun-based arguments like *validator*.

>  *convert* will keep working until at least January 2019 while raising a ``DeprecationWarning``.

>  `307 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/307&gt;`_


>Changes
>^^^^^^^

>- Generated ``__hash__`` methods now hash the class type along with the attribute values.
>  Until now the hashes of two classes with the same values were identical which was a bug.

>  The generated method is also *much* faster now.

>  `261 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/261&gt;`_,
>  `295 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/295&gt;`_,
>  `296 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/296&gt;`_
>- ``attr.ib``\ ’s ``metadata`` argument now defaults to a unique empty ``dict`` instance instead of sharing a common empty ``dict`` for all.
>  The singleton empty ``dict`` is still enforced.

>  `280 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/280&gt;`_
>- ``ctypes`` is optional now however if it&#39;s missing, a bare ``super()`` will not work in slots classes.
>  This should only happen in special environments like Google App Engine.

>  `284 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/284&gt;`_,
>  `286 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/286&gt;`_
>- The attribute redefinition feature introduced in 17.3.0 now takes into account if an attribute is redefined via multiple inheritance.
>  In that case, the definition that is closer to the base of the class hierarchy wins.

>  `285 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/285&gt;`_,
>  `287 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/287&gt;`_
>- Subclasses of ``auto_attribs=True`` can be empty now.

>  `291 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/291&gt;`_,
>  `292 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/292&gt;`_
>- Equality tests are *much* faster now.

>  `306 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/306&gt;`_
>- All generated methods now have correct ``__module__``, ``__name__``, and (on Python 3) ``__qualname__`` attributes.

>  `309 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/309&gt;`_


>----











That's it for now!

Happy merging! 🤖

bors-fusion bot added a commit to fusionapp/entropy that referenced this pull request Jan 1, 2018

Merge #167
167: Scheduled weekly dependency update for week 00 r=mithrandi a=pyup-bot




## Updates
Here's a list of all the updates bundled in this pull request. I've added some links to make it easier for you to find all the information you need.
<table align="center">

<tr>
<td><b>asn1crypto</b></td>
<td align="center">0.23.0</td>
<td align="center">&raquo;</td>
<td align="center">0.24.0</td>
<td>
     <a href="https://pypi.python.org/pypi/asn1crypto">PyPI</a> | <a href="https://pyup.io/changelogs/asn1crypto/">Changelog</a> | <a href="https://github.com/wbond/asn1crypto/issues">Repo</a> 

</td>

<tr>
<td><b>attrs</b></td>
<td align="center">17.3.0</td>
<td align="center">&raquo;</td>
<td align="center">17.4.0</td>
<td>
     <a href="https://pypi.python.org/pypi/attrs">PyPI</a> | <a href="https://pyup.io/changelogs/attrs/">Changelog</a> | <a href="http://www.attrs.org/">Homepage</a> 

</td>

<tr>
<td><b>ipaddress</b></td>
<td align="center">1.0.18</td>
<td align="center">&raquo;</td>
<td align="center">1.0.19</td>
<td>
     <a href="https://pypi.python.org/pypi/ipaddress">PyPI</a> | <a href="https://github.com/phihag/ipaddress">Repo</a> 

</td>

<tr>
<td><b>txaws</b></td>
<td align="center">0.4.0</td>
<td align="center">&raquo;</td>
<td align="center">0.5.0</td>
<td>
     <a href="https://pypi.python.org/pypi/txaws">PyPI</a> | <a href="https://pyup.io/changelogs/txaws/">Changelog</a> | <a href="https://github.com/twisted/txaws">Repo</a> 

</td>

</tr>
</table>



## Changelogs


### asn1crypto 0.23.0 -> 0.24.0

>### 0.24.0


> - `x509.Certificate().self_signed` will no longer return `&quot;yes&quot;` under any
>   circumstances. This helps prevent confusion since the library does not
>   verify the signature. Instead a library like oscrypto should be used
>   to confirm if a certificate is self-signed.
> - Added various OIDs to `x509.KeyPurposeId()`
> - Added `x509.Certificate().private_key_usage_period_value`
> - Added structures for parsing common subject directory attributes for
>   X.509 certificates, including `x509.SubjectDirectoryAttribute()`
> - Added `algos.AnyAlgorithmIdentifier()` for situations where an
>   algorithm identifier may contain a digest, signed digest or encryption
>   algorithm OID
> - Fixed a bug with `x509.Certificate().subject_directory_attributes_value`
>   not returning the correct value
> - Fixed a bug where explicitly-tagged fields in a `core.Sequence()` would
>   not function properly when the field had a default value
> - Fixed a bug with type checking in `pem.armor()`







### attrs 17.3.0 -> 17.4.0

>### 17.4.0

>-------------------

>Backward-incompatible Changes
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>- The traversal of MROs when using multiple inheritance was backward:
>  If you defined a class ``C`` that subclasses ``A`` and ``B`` like ``C(A, B)``, ``attrs`` would have collected the attributes from ``B`` *before* those of ``A``.

>  This is now fixed and means that in classes that employ multiple inheritance, the output of ``__repr__`` and the order of positional arguments in ``__init__`` changes.
>  Due to the nature of this bug, a proper deprecation cycle was unfortunately impossible.

>  Generally speaking, it&#39;s advisable to prefer ``kwargs``-based initialization anyways – *especially* if you employ multiple inheritance and diamond-shaped hierarchies.

>  `298 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/298&gt;`_,
>  `299 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/299&gt;`_,
>  `304 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/304&gt;`_
>- The ``__repr__`` set by ``attrs``
>  no longer produces an ``AttributeError``
>  when the instance is missing some of the specified attributes
>  (either through deleting
>  or after using ``init=False`` on some attributes).

>  This can break code
>  that relied on ``repr(attr_cls_instance)`` raising ``AttributeError``
>  to check if any attr-specified members were unset.

>  If you were using this,
>  you can implement a custom method for checking this::

>      def has_unset_members(self):
>          for field in attr.fields(type(self)):
>              try:
>                  getattr(self, field.name)
>              except AttributeError:
>                  return True
>          return False

>  `308 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/308&gt;`_


>Deprecations
>^^^^^^^^^^^^

>- The ``attr.ib(convert=callable)`` option is now deprecated in favor of ``attr.ib(converter=callable)``.

>  This is done to achieve consistency with other noun-based arguments like *validator*.

>  *convert* will keep working until at least January 2019 while raising a ``DeprecationWarning``.

>  `307 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/307&gt;`_


>Changes
>^^^^^^^

>- Generated ``__hash__`` methods now hash the class type along with the attribute values.
>  Until now the hashes of two classes with the same values were identical which was a bug.

>  The generated method is also *much* faster now.

>  `261 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/261&gt;`_,
>  `295 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/295&gt;`_,
>  `296 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/296&gt;`_
>- ``attr.ib``\ ’s ``metadata`` argument now defaults to a unique empty ``dict`` instance instead of sharing a common empty ``dict`` for all.
>  The singleton empty ``dict`` is still enforced.

>  `280 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/280&gt;`_
>- ``ctypes`` is optional now however if it&#39;s missing, a bare ``super()`` will not work in slots classes.
>  This should only happen in special environments like Google App Engine.

>  `284 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/284&gt;`_,
>  `286 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/286&gt;`_
>- The attribute redefinition feature introduced in 17.3.0 now takes into account if an attribute is redefined via multiple inheritance.
>  In that case, the definition that is closer to the base of the class hierarchy wins.

>  `285 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/285&gt;`_,
>  `287 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/287&gt;`_
>- Subclasses of ``auto_attribs=True`` can be empty now.

>  `291 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/291&gt;`_,
>  `292 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/292&gt;`_
>- Equality tests are *much* faster now.

>  `306 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/306&gt;`_
>- All generated methods now have correct ``__module__``, ``__name__``, and (on Python 3) ``__qualname__`` attributes.

>  `309 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/309&gt;`_


>----











That's it for now!

Happy merging! 🤖

bors-fusion bot added a commit to fusionapp/fusion-index that referenced this pull request Jan 1, 2018

Merge #174
174: Scheduled weekly dependency update for week 00 r=mithrandi a=pyup-bot




## Updates
Here's a list of all the updates bundled in this pull request. I've added some links to make it easier for you to find all the information you need.
<table align="center">

<tr>
<td><b>asn1crypto</b></td>
<td align="center">0.23.0</td>
<td align="center">&raquo;</td>
<td align="center">0.24.0</td>
<td>
     <a href="https://pypi.python.org/pypi/asn1crypto">PyPI</a> | <a href="https://pyup.io/changelogs/asn1crypto/">Changelog</a> | <a href="https://github.com/wbond/asn1crypto/issues">Repo</a> 

</td>

<tr>
<td><b>attrs</b></td>
<td align="center">17.3.0</td>
<td align="center">&raquo;</td>
<td align="center">17.4.0</td>
<td>
     <a href="https://pypi.python.org/pypi/attrs">PyPI</a> | <a href="https://pyup.io/changelogs/attrs/">Changelog</a> | <a href="http://www.attrs.org/">Homepage</a> 

</td>

<tr>
<td><b>hypothesis</b></td>
<td align="center">3.40.1</td>
<td align="center">&raquo;</td>
<td align="center">3.44.4</td>
<td>
     <a href="https://pypi.python.org/pypi/hypothesis">PyPI</a> | <a href="https://pyup.io/changelogs/hypothesis/">Changelog</a> | <a href="https://github.com/HypothesisWorks/hypothesis/issues">Repo</a> 

</td>

<tr>
<td><b>ipaddress</b></td>
<td align="center">1.0.18</td>
<td align="center">&raquo;</td>
<td align="center">1.0.19</td>
<td>
     <a href="https://pypi.python.org/pypi/ipaddress">PyPI</a> | <a href="https://github.com/phihag/ipaddress">Repo</a> 

</td>

<tr>
<td><b>pyrsistent</b></td>
<td align="center">0.14.1</td>
<td align="center">&raquo;</td>
<td align="center">0.14.2</td>
<td>
     <a href="https://pypi.python.org/pypi/pyrsistent">PyPI</a> | <a href="https://pyup.io/changelogs/pyrsistent/">Changelog</a> | <a href="http://github.com/tobgu/pyrsistent/">Repo</a> 

</td>

<tr>
<td><b>toolz</b></td>
<td align="center">0.8.2</td>
<td align="center">&raquo;</td>
<td align="center">0.9.0</td>
<td>
     <a href="https://pypi.python.org/pypi/toolz">PyPI</a> | <a href="https://github.com/pytoolz/toolz">Repo</a> 

</td>

</tr>
</table>



## Changelogs


### asn1crypto 0.23.0 -> 0.24.0

>### 0.24.0


> - `x509.Certificate().self_signed` will no longer return `&quot;yes&quot;` under any
>   circumstances. This helps prevent confusion since the library does not
>   verify the signature. Instead a library like oscrypto should be used
>   to confirm if a certificate is self-signed.
> - Added various OIDs to `x509.KeyPurposeId()`
> - Added `x509.Certificate().private_key_usage_period_value`
> - Added structures for parsing common subject directory attributes for
>   X.509 certificates, including `x509.SubjectDirectoryAttribute()`
> - Added `algos.AnyAlgorithmIdentifier()` for situations where an
>   algorithm identifier may contain a digest, signed digest or encryption
>   algorithm OID
> - Fixed a bug with `x509.Certificate().subject_directory_attributes_value`
>   not returning the correct value
> - Fixed a bug where explicitly-tagged fields in a `core.Sequence()` would
>   not function properly when the field had a default value
> - Fixed a bug with type checking in `pem.armor()`







### attrs 17.3.0 -> 17.4.0

>### 17.4.0

>-------------------

>Backward-incompatible Changes
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>- The traversal of MROs when using multiple inheritance was backward:
>  If you defined a class ``C`` that subclasses ``A`` and ``B`` like ``C(A, B)``, ``attrs`` would have collected the attributes from ``B`` *before* those of ``A``.

>  This is now fixed and means that in classes that employ multiple inheritance, the output of ``__repr__`` and the order of positional arguments in ``__init__`` changes.
>  Due to the nature of this bug, a proper deprecation cycle was unfortunately impossible.

>  Generally speaking, it&#39;s advisable to prefer ``kwargs``-based initialization anyways – *especially* if you employ multiple inheritance and diamond-shaped hierarchies.

>  `298 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/298&gt;`_,
>  `299 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/299&gt;`_,
>  `304 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/304&gt;`_
>- The ``__repr__`` set by ``attrs``
>  no longer produces an ``AttributeError``
>  when the instance is missing some of the specified attributes
>  (either through deleting
>  or after using ``init=False`` on some attributes).

>  This can break code
>  that relied on ``repr(attr_cls_instance)`` raising ``AttributeError``
>  to check if any attr-specified members were unset.

>  If you were using this,
>  you can implement a custom method for checking this::

>      def has_unset_members(self):
>          for field in attr.fields(type(self)):
>              try:
>                  getattr(self, field.name)
>              except AttributeError:
>                  return True
>          return False

>  `308 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/308&gt;`_


>Deprecations
>^^^^^^^^^^^^

>- The ``attr.ib(convert=callable)`` option is now deprecated in favor of ``attr.ib(converter=callable)``.

>  This is done to achieve consistency with other noun-based arguments like *validator*.

>  *convert* will keep working until at least January 2019 while raising a ``DeprecationWarning``.

>  `307 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/307&gt;`_


>Changes
>^^^^^^^

>- Generated ``__hash__`` methods now hash the class type along with the attribute values.
>  Until now the hashes of two classes with the same values were identical which was a bug.

>  The generated method is also *much* faster now.

>  `261 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/261&gt;`_,
>  `295 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/295&gt;`_,
>  `296 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/296&gt;`_
>- ``attr.ib``\ ’s ``metadata`` argument now defaults to a unique empty ``dict`` instance instead of sharing a common empty ``dict`` for all.
>  The singleton empty ``dict`` is still enforced.

>  `280 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/280&gt;`_
>- ``ctypes`` is optional now however if it&#39;s missing, a bare ``super()`` will not work in slots classes.
>  This should only happen in special environments like Google App Engine.

>  `284 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/284&gt;`_,
>  `286 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/286&gt;`_
>- The attribute redefinition feature introduced in 17.3.0 now takes into account if an attribute is redefined via multiple inheritance.
>  In that case, the definition that is closer to the base of the class hierarchy wins.

>  `285 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/285&gt;`_,
>  `287 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/287&gt;`_
>- Subclasses of ``auto_attribs=True`` can be empty now.

>  `291 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/291&gt;`_,
>  `292 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/292&gt;`_
>- Equality tests are *much* faster now.

>  `306 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/306&gt;`_
>- All generated methods now have correct ``__module__``, ``__name__``, and (on Python 3) ``__qualname__`` attributes.

>  `309 &lt;https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/issues/309&gt;`_


>----








### hypothesis 3.40.1 -> 3.44.4

>### 3.44.4

>-------------------

>This release fixes :issue:`1044`, which slowed tests by up to 6%
>due to broken caching.

>-------------------


>### 3.44.3

>-------------------

>This release improves the shrinker in cases where examples drawn earlier can
>affect how much data is drawn later (e.g. when you draw a length parameter in
>a composite and then draw that many elements). Examples found in cases like
>this should now be much closer to minimal.

>-------------------


>### 3.44.2

>-------------------

>This is a pure refactoring release which changes how Hypothesis manages its
>set of examples internally. It should have no externally visible effects.

>-------------------


>### 3.44.1

>-------------------

>This release fixes :issue:`997`, in which under some circumstances the body of
>tests run under Hypothesis would not show up when run under coverage even
>though the tests were run and the code they called outside of the test file
>would show up normally.

>-------------------


>### 3.44.0

>-------------------

>This release adds a new feature: The :ref:`reproduce_failure &lt;reproduce_failure&gt;`,
>designed to make it easy to use Hypothesis&#39;s binary format for examples to
>reproduce a problem locally without having to share your example database
>between machines.

>This also changes when seeds are printed:

>* They will no longer be printed for
>  normal falsifying examples, as there are now adequate ways of reproducing those
>  for all cases, so it just contributes noise.
>* They will once again be printed when reusing examples from the database, as
>  health check failures should now be more reliable in this scenario so it will
>  almost always work in this case.

>This work was funded by `Smarkets &lt;https://smarkets.com/&gt;`_.

>-------------------


>### 3.43.1

>-------------------

>This release fixes a bug with Hypothesis&#39;s database management - examples that
>were found in the course of shrinking were saved in a way that indicated that
>they had distinct causes, and so they would all be retried on the start of the
>next test. The intended behaviour, which is now what is implemented, is that
>only a bounded subset of these examples would be retried.

>-------------------


>### 3.43.0

>-------------------

>:exc:`~hypothesis.errors.HypothesisDeprecationWarning` now inherits from
>:exc:`python:FutureWarning` instead of :exc:`python:DeprecationWarning`,
>as recommended by :pep:`565` for user-facing warnings (:issue:`618`).
>If you have not changed the default warnings settings, you will now see
>each distinct :exc:`~hypothesis.errors.HypothesisDeprecationWarning`
>instead of only the first.

>-------------------


>### 3.42.2

>-------------------

>This patch fixes :issue:`1017`, where instances of a list or tuple subtype
>used as an argument to a strategy would be coerced to tuple.

>-------------------


>### 3.42.1

>-------------------

>This release has some internal cleanup, which makes reading the code
>more pleasant and may shrink large examples slightly faster.

>-------------------


>### 3.42.0

>-------------------

>This release deprecates :ref:`faker-extra`, which was designed as a transition
>strategy but does not support example shrinking or coverage-guided discovery.

>-------------------


>### 3.41.0

>-------------------

>:func:`~hypothesis.strategies.sampled_from` can now sample from
>one-dimensional numpy ndarrays. Sampling from multi-dimensional
>ndarrays still results in a deprecation warning. Thanks to Charlie
>Tanksley for this patch.

>-------------------






### pyrsistent 0.14.1 -> 0.14.2

>### 0.14.2

> * Fix 121, regression in PClass.set() introduced in 0.14.1.










That's it for now!

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