I have a (python3) package that has completely different behaviour depending on how it's init()ed (perhaps not the best design, but rewriting is not an option). The module can only be init()ed once, a second time gives an error. I want to test this package (both behaviours) using py.test.
Note: the nature of the package makes the two behaviours mutually exclusive, there is no possible reason to ever want both in a singular program.
I have serveral test_xxx.py modules in my test directory. Each module will init the package in the way in needs (using fixtures). Since py.test starts the python interpreter once, running all test-modules in one py.test run fails.
Monkey-patching the package to allow a second init() is not something I want to do, since there is internal caching etc that might result in unexplained behaviour.
Is it possible to tell py.test to run each test module in a separate python process (thereby not being influenced by inits in another test-module)
Is there a way to reliably reload a package (including all sub-dependencies, etc)?
Is there another solution (I'm thinking of importing and then unimporting the package in a fixture, but this seems excessive)?
To reload a module, try using the reload() from library importlib
Example:
from importlib import reload
import some_lib
#do something
reload(some_lib)
Also, launching each test in a new process is viable, but multiprocessed code is kind of painful to debug.
Example
import some_test
from multiprocessing import Manager, Process
#create new return value holder, in this case a list
manager = Manager()
return_value = manager.list()
#create new process
process = Process(target=some_test.some_function, args=(arg, return_value))
#execute process
process.start()
#finish and return process
process.join()
#you can now use your return value as if it were a normal list,
#as long as it was assigned in your subprocess
Delete all your module imports and also your tests import that also import your modules:
import sys
for key in list(sys.modules.keys()):
if key.startswith("your_package_name") or key.startswith("test"):
del sys.modules[key]
you can use this as a fixture by configuring on your conftest.py file a fixture using the #pytest.fixture decorator.
Once I had similar problem, quite bad design though..
#pytest.fixture()
def module_type1():
mod = importlib.import_module('example')
mod._init(10)
yield mod
del sys.modules['example']
#pytest.fixture()
def module_type2():
mod = importlib.import_module('example')
mod._init(20)
yield mod
del sys.modules['example']
def test1(module_type1)
pass
def test2(module_type2)
pass
The example/init.py had something like this
def _init(val):
if 'sample' in globals():
logger.info(f'example already imported, val{sample}' )
else:
globals()['sample'] = val
logger.info(f'importing example with val : {val}')
output:
importing example with val : 10
importing example with val : 20
No clue as to how complex your package is, but if its just global variables, then this probably helps.
I have the same problem, and found three solutions:
reload(some_lib)
patch SUT, as the imported method is a key and value in SUT, you can patch the
SUT. Example, if you use f2 of m2 in m1, you can patch m1.f2 instead of m2.f2
import module, and use module.function.
Related
I am currently running a unittest script which successfully passes the various specified test with a nagging ImportWarning message in the console:
...../lib/python3.6/importlib/_bootstrap.py:219: ImportWarning: can't resolve package from __spec__ or __package__, falling back on __name__ and __path__
return f(*args, **kwds)
....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ran 7 tests in 1.950s
OK
The script is run with this main function:
if __name__ == '__main__':
unittest.main()
I have read that warnings can be surpressed when the script is called like this:
python -W ignore:ImportWarning -m unittest testscript.py
However, is there a way of specifying this ignore warning in the script itself so that I don't have to call -W ignore:ImportWarning every time that the testscript is run?
Thanks in advance.
To programmatically prevent such warnings from showing up, adjust your code so that:
import warnings
if __name__ == '__main__':
with warnings.catch_warnings():
warnings.simplefilter('ignore', category=ImportWarning)
unittest.main()
Source: https://stackoverflow.com/a/40994600/328469
Update:
#billjoie is certainly correct. If the OP chooses to make answer 52463661 the accepted answer, I am OK with that. I can confirm that the following is effective at suppressing such warning messages at run-time using python versions 2.7.11, 3.4.3, 3.5.4, 3.6.5, and 3.7.1:
#! /usr/bin/env python
# -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
import unittest
import warnings
class TestPandasImport(unittest.TestCase):
def setUp(self):
warnings.simplefilter('ignore', category=ImportWarning)
def test_01(self):
import pandas # noqa: E402
self.assertTrue(True)
def test_02(self):
import pandas # noqa: E402
self.assertFalse(False)
if __name__ == '__main__':
unittest.main()
However, I think that the OP should consider doing some deeper investigation into the application code targets of the unit tests, and try to identify the specific package import or operation which is causing the actual warning, and then suppress the warning as closely as possible to the location in code where the violation takes place. This will obviate the suppression of warnings throughout the entirety of one's unit test class, which may be inadvertently obscuring warnings from other parts of the program.
Outside the unit test, somewhere in the application code:
with warnings.catch_warnings():
warnings.simplefilter('ignore', category=ImportWarning)
# import pandas
# or_ideally_the_application_code_unit_that_imports_pandas()
It could take a bit of work to isolate the specific spot in the code that is either causing the warning or leveraging third-party software which causes the warning, but the developer will obtain a clearer understanding of the reason for the warning, and this will only improve the overall maintainability of the program.
I had the same problem, and starting my unittest script with a warnings.simplefilter() statement, as described by Nels, dit not work for me. According to this source, this is because:
[...] as of Python 3.2, the unittest module was updated to use the warnings module default filter when running tests, and [...] resets to the default filter before each test, meaning that any change you may think you are making scriptwide by using warnings.simplefilter(“ignore”) at the beginning of your script gets overridden in between every test.
This same source recommends to renew the filter inside of each test function, either directly or with an elegant decorator. A simpler solution is to define the warnings filter inside unittest's setUp() method, which is run right before each test.
import unittest
class TestSomething(unittest.TestCase):
def setUp(self):
warnings.simplefilter('ignore', category=ImportWarning)
# Other initialization stuff here
def test_a(self):
# Test assertion here.
if __name__ == '__main__':
unittest.main()
I had the same warning in Pycharm for one test when using unittest. This warning disappeared when I stopped trying to import a library during the test (I moved the import to the top where it's supposed to be). I know the request was for suppression, but this would also make it disappear if it's only happening in a select number of tests.
Solutions with def setUp suppress warnings for all methods within class. If you don't want to suppress it for all of them, you can use decorator.
From Neural Dump:
def ignore_warnings(test_func):
def do_test(self, *args, **kwargs):
with warnings.catch_warnings():
warnings.simplefilter("ignore")
test_func(self, *args, **kwargs)
return do_test
Then you can use it to decorate single test method in your test class:
class TestClass(unittest.TestCase):
#ignore_warnings
def test_do_something_without_warning()
self.assertEqual(whatever)
def test_something_else_with_warning()
self.assertEqual(whatever)
I've run into a bit of a wall importing modules in a Python script. I'll do my best to describe the error, why I run into it, and why I'm tying this particular approach to solve my problem (which I will describe in a second):
Let's suppose I have a module in which I've defined some utility functions/classes, which refer to entities defined in the namespace into which this auxiliary module will be imported (let "a" be such an entity):
module1:
def f():
print a
And then I have the main program, where "a" is defined, into which I want to import those utilities:
import module1
a=3
module1.f()
Executing the program will trigger the following error:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "Z:\Python\main.py", line 10, in <module>
module1.f()
File "Z:\Python\module1.py", line 3, in f
print a
NameError: global name 'a' is not defined
Similar questions have been asked in the past (two days ago, d'uh) and several solutions have been suggested, however I don't really think these fit my requirements. Here's my particular context:
I'm trying to make a Python program which connects to a MySQL database server and displays/modifies data with a GUI. For cleanliness sake, I've defined the bunch of auxiliary/utility MySQL-related functions in a separate file. However they all have a common variable, which I had originally defined inside the utilities module, and which is the cursor object from MySQLdb module.
I later realised that the cursor object (which is used to communicate with the db server) should be defined in the main module, so that both the main module and anything that is imported into it can access that object.
End result would be something like this:
utilities_module.py:
def utility_1(args):
code which references a variable named "cur"
def utility_n(args):
etcetera
And my main module:
program.py:
import MySQLdb, Tkinter
db=MySQLdb.connect(#blahblah) ; cur=db.cursor() #cur is defined!
from utilities_module import *
And then, as soon as I try to call any of the utilities functions, it triggers the aforementioned "global name not defined" error.
A particular suggestion was to have a "from program import cur" statement in the utilities file, such as this:
utilities_module.py:
from program import cur
#rest of function definitions
program.py:
import Tkinter, MySQLdb
db=MySQLdb.connect(#blahblah) ; cur=db.cursor() #cur is defined!
from utilities_module import *
But that's cyclic import or something like that and, bottom line, it crashes too. So my question is:
How in hell can I make the "cur" object, defined in the main module, visible to those auxiliary functions which are imported into it?
Thanks for your time and my deepest apologies if the solution has been posted elsewhere. I just can't find the answer myself and I've got no more tricks in my book.
Globals in Python are global to a module, not across all modules. (Many people are confused by this, because in, say, C, a global is the same across all implementation files unless you explicitly make it static.)
There are different ways to solve this, depending on your actual use case.
Before even going down this path, ask yourself whether this really needs to be global. Maybe you really want a class, with f as an instance method, rather than just a free function? Then you could do something like this:
import module1
thingy1 = module1.Thingy(a=3)
thingy1.f()
If you really do want a global, but it's just there to be used by module1, set it in that module.
import module1
module1.a=3
module1.f()
On the other hand, if a is shared by a whole lot of modules, put it somewhere else, and have everyone import it:
import shared_stuff
import module1
shared_stuff.a = 3
module1.f()
… and, in module1.py:
import shared_stuff
def f():
print shared_stuff.a
Don't use a from import unless the variable is intended to be a constant. from shared_stuff import a would create a new a variable initialized to whatever shared_stuff.a referred to at the time of the import, and this new a variable would not be affected by assignments to shared_stuff.a.
Or, in the rare case that you really do need it to be truly global everywhere, like a builtin, add it to the builtin module. The exact details differ between Python 2.x and 3.x. In 3.x, it works like this:
import builtins
import module1
builtins.a = 3
module1.f()
As a workaround, you could consider setting environment variables in the outer layer, like this.
main.py:
import os
os.environ['MYVAL'] = str(myintvariable)
mymodule.py:
import os
myval = None
if 'MYVAL' in os.environ:
myval = os.environ['MYVAL']
As an extra precaution, handle the case when MYVAL is not defined inside the module.
This post is just an observation for Python behaviour I encountered. Maybe the advices you read above don't work for you if you made the same thing I did below.
Namely, I have a module which contains global/shared variables (as suggested above):
#sharedstuff.py
globaltimes_randomnode=[]
globalist_randomnode=[]
Then I had the main module which imports the shared stuff with:
import sharedstuff as shared
and some other modules that actually populated these arrays. These are called by the main module. When exiting these other modules I can clearly see that the arrays are populated. But when reading them back in the main module, they were empty. This was rather strange for me (well, I am new to Python). However, when I change the way I import the sharedstuff.py in the main module to:
from globals import *
it worked (the arrays were populated).
Just sayin'
A function uses the globals of the module it's defined in. Instead of setting a = 3, for example, you should be setting module1.a = 3. So, if you want cur available as a global in utilities_module, set utilities_module.cur.
A better solution: don't use globals. Pass the variables you need into the functions that need it, or create a class to bundle all the data together, and pass it when initializing the instance.
The easiest solution to this particular problem would have been to add another function within the module that would have stored the cursor in a variable global to the module. Then all the other functions could use it as well.
module1:
cursor = None
def setCursor(cur):
global cursor
cursor = cur
def method(some, args):
global cursor
do_stuff(cursor, some, args)
main program:
import module1
cursor = get_a_cursor()
module1.setCursor(cursor)
module1.method()
Since globals are module specific, you can add the following function to all imported modules, and then use it to:
Add singular variables (in dictionary format) as globals for those
Transfer your main module globals to it
.
addglobals = lambda x: globals().update(x)
Then all you need to pass on current globals is:
import module
module.addglobals(globals())
Since I haven't seen it in the answers above, I thought I would add my simple workaround, which is just to add a global_dict argument to the function requiring the calling module's globals, and then pass the dict into the function when calling; e.g:
# external_module
def imported_function(global_dict=None):
print(global_dict["a"])
# calling_module
a = 12
from external_module import imported_function
imported_function(global_dict=globals())
>>> 12
The OOP way of doing this would be to make your module a class instead of a set of unbound methods. Then you could use __init__ or a setter method to set the variables from the caller for use in the module methods.
Update
To test the theory, I created a module and put it on pypi. It all worked perfectly.
pip install superglobals
Short answer
This works fine in Python 2 or 3:
import inspect
def superglobals():
_globals = dict(inspect.getmembers(
inspect.stack()[len(inspect.stack()) - 1][0]))["f_globals"]
return _globals
save as superglobals.py and employ in another module thusly:
from superglobals import *
superglobals()['var'] = value
Extended Answer
You can add some extra functions to make things more attractive.
def superglobals():
_globals = dict(inspect.getmembers(
inspect.stack()[len(inspect.stack()) - 1][0]))["f_globals"]
return _globals
def getglobal(key, default=None):
"""
getglobal(key[, default]) -> value
Return the value for key if key is in the global dictionary, else default.
"""
_globals = dict(inspect.getmembers(
inspect.stack()[len(inspect.stack()) - 1][0]))["f_globals"]
return _globals.get(key, default)
def setglobal(key, value):
_globals = superglobals()
_globals[key] = value
def defaultglobal(key, value):
"""
defaultglobal(key, value)
Set the value of global variable `key` if it is not otherwise st
"""
_globals = superglobals()
if key not in _globals:
_globals[key] = value
Then use thusly:
from superglobals import *
setglobal('test', 123)
defaultglobal('test', 456)
assert(getglobal('test') == 123)
Justification
The "python purity league" answers that litter this question are perfectly correct, but in some environments (such as IDAPython) which is basically single threaded with a large globally instantiated API, it just doesn't matter as much.
It's still bad form and a bad practice to encourage, but sometimes it's just easier. Especially when the code you are writing isn't going to have a very long life.
I want to import asyncore from a different directory, because I need to make some changes to how asyncore works, and don't want to modify the base file.
I could include it in the folder with my script, but after putting all the modules I need there it ends up getting rather cluttered.
I'm well aware of making a sub directory and putting a blank __init__.py file in it. This doesn't work. I'm not exactly sure what happens, but when I import asyncore from a sub directory, asyncore just plain stops working. Specifically; the connect method doesn't get run at all, even though I'm calling it. Moving asyncore to the main directory and importing it normally removes this problem.
I skimmed down my code significantly, but this still has the same problem:
from Modules import asyncore
from Modules import asynchat
from Modules import socket
class runBot(asynchat.async_chat, object):
def __init__(self):
asynchat.async_chat.__init__(self)
self.connect_to_twitch()
def connect_to_twitch(self):
self.create_socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_STREAM)
self.connect(('irc.chat.twitch.tv',6667))
self.set_terminator('\n')
self.buffer=[]
def collect_incoming_data(self, data):
self.buffer.append(data)
def found_terminator(self):
msg = ''.join(self.buffer)
print(msg)
if __name__ == '__main__':
# Assign bots to channels
bot = runBot()
# Start bots
asyncore.loop(0.001)
I'm sure this is something really simple I'm overlooking, but I'm just not able to figure this out.
Use sys.path.append -- see https://docs.python.org/3/tutorial/modules.html for the details.
Update: Try to put a debug print to the beginning and end of sources of your modules to see whether they are imported as expected. You can also print __file__ attribute for the module/object that you want to use to see, whether you imported what you expected -- like:
import re
#...
print(re.__file__)
I am confused about some behavior of Python. I always thought importing a module basically meant executing it. (Like they say here: Does python execute imports on importation) So I created three simple scripts to test something:
main.py
import config
print(config.a)
config.a += 1
print(config.a)
import test
print(config.a)
config.py
def get_a():
print("get_a is called")
return 1
a = get_a()
test.py
import config
print(config.a)
config.a += 1
The output when running main.py is:
get_a is called
1
2
2
3
Now I am confused because I expected get_a() to be called twice, once from main.py and once from test.py. Can someone please explain why it is not? What if I really wanted to import config a second time, like it was in the beginning with a=1?
(Fortunately, for my project this behavior is exactly what I wanted, because get_a() corresponds to a function, which reads lots of data from a database and of course I only want to read it once, but it should be accessible from multiple modules.)
Because the config module is already loaded so there's no need to 'run' it anymore, just return the loaded instance.
Some standard library modules make use of this, from example random. It creates an object of class Random on first import and reuses it when it gets imported again. A comment on the module reads:
# Create one instance, seeded from current time, and export its methods
# as module-level functions. The functions share state across all uses
#(both in the user's code and in the Python libraries), but that's fine
# for most programs and is easier for the casual user than making them
# instantiate their own Random() instance.
Print can be mocked in the following way:
import unittest
import builtin
class TestSomething(unittest.TestCase):
#mock.patch('builtins.print')
def test_method(self, print_):
some_other_module.print_something()
However this means that in the python debug console (pydev debugger) and in the unit test method itself print cannot be used. This is rather inconvenient.
Is there a way to only mock the print method in some_other_module instead of in the testing module as well?
A way to sidestep this is to swap the use of print in the test module with some other function which just calls print, which I can do if there turns out to be no better solution.
#michele's "final solution" has an even cleaner alternative which works in my case:
from unittest import TestCase
from unittest.mock import patch
import module_under_test
class MyTestCase(TestCase):
#patch('module_under_test.print', create=True)
def test_something(self, print_):
module_under_test.print_something()
print_.assert_called_with("print something")
Yes you can! ... But just because you are using Python 3. In Python 3 print is a function and you can rewrite it without change the name. To understand the final solution I'll describe it step by step to have a final flexible and non intrusive solution.
Instrument Module
The trick is add at the top of your module that you will test a line like:
print = print
And now you can patch just print of your module. I wrote a test case where the mock_print_module.py is:
print = print
def print_something():
print("print something")
And the test module (I'm using autospec=True just to avoid errors like mock_print.asser_called_with):
from unittest import TestCase
from unittest.mock import patch
import mock_print_module
class MyTestCase(TestCase):
#patch("mock_print_module.print",autospec=True)
def test_something(self,mock_print):
mock_print_module.print_something()
mock_print.assert_called_with("print something")
I don't want to change my module but just patch print without lose functionalities
You can use patch on "builtins.print" without lose print functionality just by use side_effect patch's attribute:
#patch("builtins.print",autospec=True,side_effect=print)
def test_somethingelse(self,mock_print):
mock_print_module.print_something()
mock_print.assert_called_with("print something")
Now you can trace your prints call without lose the logging and pydev debugger. The drawback of that approach is that you must fight against lot of noise to check your interested the print calls. Moreover you cannot chose what modules will be patched and what not.
Both modes don't work together
You cannot use both way together because if you use print=print in your module you save builtins.print in print variable at the load module time. Now when you patch builtins.print the module still use the original saved one.
If you would have a chance to use both you must wrap original print and not just record it. A way to implement it is use following instead of print=print:
import builtins
print = lambda *args,**kwargs:builtins.print(*args,**kwargs)
The Final Solution
Do we really need to modify the original module to have a chance to patch all print calls in it? No, we can do it without change the module to test anyway. The only thing that we need is injecting a local print function in the module to override the builtins's one: we can do it in the test module instead of the the module to test. My example will become:
from unittest import TestCase
from unittest.mock import patch
import mock_print_module
import builtins
mock_print_module.print = lambda *args,**kwargs:builtins.print(*args,**kwargs)
class MyTestCase(TestCase):
#patch("mock_print_module.print",autospec=True)
def test_something(self,mock_print):
mock_print_module.print_something()
mock_print.assert_called_with("print something")
#patch("builtins.print",autospec=True,side_effect=print)
def test_somethingelse(self,mock_print):
mock_print_module.print_something()
mock_print.assert_called_with("print something")
and mock_print_module.py can be the clean original version with just:
def print_something():
print("print something")