cpython/Lib/test/test_dict.py

463 lines
13 KiB
Python
Raw Normal View History

import unittest
from test import test_support
import sys, UserDict, cStringIO
class DictTest(unittest.TestCase):
Restructure comparison dramatically. There is no longer a default *ordering* between objects; there is only a default equality test (defined by an object being equal to itself only). Read the comment in object.c. The current implementation never uses a three-way comparison to compute a rich comparison, but it does use a rich comparison to compute a three-way comparison. I'm not quite done ripping out all the calls to PyObject_Compare/Cmp, or replacing tp_compare implementations with tp_richcompare implementations; but much of that has happened (to make most unit tests pass). The following tests still fail, because I need help deciding or understanding: test_codeop -- depends on comparing code objects test_datetime -- need Tim Peters' opinion test_marshal -- depends on comparing code objects test_mutants -- need help understanding it The problem with test_codeop and test_marshal is this: these tests compare two different code objects and expect them to be equal. Is that still a feature we'd like to support? I've temporarily removed the comparison and hash code from code objects, so they use the default (equality by pointer only) comparison. For the other two tests, run them to see for yourself. (There may be more failing test with "-u all".) A general problem with getting lots of these tests to pass is the reality that for object types that have a natural total ordering, implementing __cmp__ is much more convenient than implementing __eq__, __ne__, __lt__, and so on. Should we go back to allowing __cmp__ to provide a total ordering? Should we provide some other way to implement rich comparison with a single method override? Alex proposed a __key__() method; I've considered a __richcmp__() method. Or perhaps __cmp__() just shouldn't be killed off...
2006-08-23 21:41:19 -03:00
def test_constructor(self):
# calling built-in types without argument must return empty
self.assertEqual(dict(), {})
self.assert_(dict() is not {})
def test_bool(self):
self.assert_(not {})
self.assert_({1: 2})
self.assert_(bool({}) is False)
self.assert_(bool({1: 2}) is True)
def test_keys(self):
d = {}
self.assertEqual(d.keys(), [])
d = {'a': 1, 'b': 2}
k = d.keys()
self.assert_('a' in d)
self.assert_('b' in d)
self.assertRaises(TypeError, d.keys, None)
def test_values(self):
d = {}
self.assertEqual(d.values(), [])
d = {1:2}
self.assertEqual(d.values(), [2])
self.assertRaises(TypeError, d.values, None)
def test_items(self):
d = {}
self.assertEqual(d.items(), [])
d = {1:2}
self.assertEqual(d.items(), [(1, 2)])
self.assertRaises(TypeError, d.items, None)
def test_contains(self):
d = {}
self.assert_(not ('a' in d))
self.assert_('a' not in d)
d = {'a': 1, 'b': 2}
self.assert_('a' in d)
self.assert_('b' in d)
self.assert_('c' not in d)
self.assertRaises(TypeError, d.__contains__)
def test_len(self):
d = {}
self.assertEqual(len(d), 0)
d = {'a': 1, 'b': 2}
self.assertEqual(len(d), 2)
def test_getitem(self):
d = {'a': 1, 'b': 2}
self.assertEqual(d['a'], 1)
self.assertEqual(d['b'], 2)
d['c'] = 3
d['a'] = 4
self.assertEqual(d['c'], 3)
self.assertEqual(d['a'], 4)
del d['b']
self.assertEqual(d, {'a': 4, 'c': 3})
self.assertRaises(TypeError, d.__getitem__)
class BadEq(object):
def __eq__(self, other):
raise Exc()
def __hash__(self):
return 24
d = {}
d[BadEq()] = 42
self.assertRaises(KeyError, d.__getitem__, 23)
class Exc(Exception): pass
class BadHash(object):
fail = False
def __hash__(self):
if self.fail:
raise Exc()
else:
return 42
x = BadHash()
d[x] = 42
x.fail = True
self.assertRaises(Exc, d.__getitem__, x)
def test_clear(self):
d = {1:1, 2:2, 3:3}
d.clear()
self.assertEqual(d, {})
self.assertRaises(TypeError, d.clear, None)
def test_update(self):
d = {}
d.update({1:100})
d.update({2:20})
d.update({1:1, 2:2, 3:3})
self.assertEqual(d, {1:1, 2:2, 3:3})
d.update()
self.assertEqual(d, {1:1, 2:2, 3:3})
self.assertRaises((TypeError, AttributeError), d.update, None)
class SimpleUserDict:
def __init__(self):
self.d = {1:1, 2:2, 3:3}
def keys(self):
return self.d.keys()
def __getitem__(self, i):
return self.d[i]
d.clear()
d.update(SimpleUserDict())
self.assertEqual(d, {1:1, 2:2, 3:3})
class Exc(Exception): pass
d.clear()
class FailingUserDict:
def keys(self):
raise Exc
self.assertRaises(Exc, d.update, FailingUserDict())
class FailingUserDict:
def keys(self):
class BogonIter:
def __init__(self):
self.i = 1
def __iter__(self):
return self
def next(self):
if self.i:
self.i = 0
return 'a'
raise Exc
return BogonIter()
def __getitem__(self, key):
return key
self.assertRaises(Exc, d.update, FailingUserDict())
class FailingUserDict:
def keys(self):
class BogonIter:
def __init__(self):
self.i = ord('a')
def __iter__(self):
return self
def next(self):
if self.i <= ord('z'):
rtn = chr(self.i)
self.i += 1
return rtn
raise StopIteration
return BogonIter()
def __getitem__(self, key):
raise Exc
self.assertRaises(Exc, d.update, FailingUserDict())
class badseq(object):
def __iter__(self):
return self
def next(self):
raise Exc()
self.assertRaises(Exc, {}.update, badseq())
self.assertRaises(ValueError, {}.update, [(1, 2, 3)])
def test_fromkeys(self):
self.assertEqual(dict.fromkeys('abc'), {'a':None, 'b':None, 'c':None})
d = {}
self.assert_(not(d.fromkeys('abc') is d))
self.assertEqual(d.fromkeys('abc'), {'a':None, 'b':None, 'c':None})
self.assertEqual(d.fromkeys((4,5),0), {4:0, 5:0})
self.assertEqual(d.fromkeys([]), {})
def g():
yield 1
self.assertEqual(d.fromkeys(g()), {1:None})
self.assertRaises(TypeError, {}.fromkeys, 3)
class dictlike(dict): pass
self.assertEqual(dictlike.fromkeys('a'), {'a':None})
self.assertEqual(dictlike().fromkeys('a'), {'a':None})
self.assert_(type(dictlike.fromkeys('a')) is dictlike)
self.assert_(type(dictlike().fromkeys('a')) is dictlike)
class mydict(dict):
def __new__(cls):
return UserDict.UserDict()
ud = mydict.fromkeys('ab')
self.assertEqual(ud, {'a':None, 'b':None})
self.assert_(isinstance(ud, UserDict.UserDict))
self.assertRaises(TypeError, dict.fromkeys)
class Exc(Exception): pass
class baddict1(dict):
def __init__(self):
raise Exc()
self.assertRaises(Exc, baddict1.fromkeys, [1])
class BadSeq(object):
def __iter__(self):
return self
def next(self):
raise Exc()
self.assertRaises(Exc, dict.fromkeys, BadSeq())
class baddict2(dict):
def __setitem__(self, key, value):
raise Exc()
self.assertRaises(Exc, baddict2.fromkeys, [1])
def test_copy(self):
d = {1:1, 2:2, 3:3}
self.assertEqual(d.copy(), {1:1, 2:2, 3:3})
self.assertEqual({}.copy(), {})
self.assertRaises(TypeError, d.copy, None)
def test_get(self):
d = {}
self.assert_(d.get('c') is None)
self.assertEqual(d.get('c', 3), 3)
d = {'a' : 1, 'b' : 2}
self.assert_(d.get('c') is None)
self.assertEqual(d.get('c', 3), 3)
self.assertEqual(d.get('a'), 1)
self.assertEqual(d.get('a', 3), 1)
self.assertRaises(TypeError, d.get)
self.assertRaises(TypeError, d.get, None, None, None)
def test_setdefault(self):
# dict.setdefault()
d = {}
self.assert_(d.setdefault('key0') is None)
d.setdefault('key0', [])
self.assert_(d.setdefault('key0') is None)
d.setdefault('key', []).append(3)
self.assertEqual(d['key'][0], 3)
d.setdefault('key', []).append(4)
self.assertEqual(len(d['key']), 2)
self.assertRaises(TypeError, d.setdefault)
class Exc(Exception): pass
class BadHash(object):
fail = False
def __hash__(self):
if self.fail:
raise Exc()
else:
return 42
x = BadHash()
d[x] = 42
x.fail = True
self.assertRaises(Exc, d.setdefault, x, [])
def test_popitem(self):
# dict.popitem()
for copymode in -1, +1:
# -1: b has same structure as a
# +1: b is a.copy()
for log2size in range(12):
size = 2**log2size
a = {}
b = {}
for i in range(size):
a[repr(i)] = i
if copymode < 0:
b[repr(i)] = i
if copymode > 0:
b = a.copy()
for i in range(size):
ka, va = ta = a.popitem()
self.assertEqual(va, int(ka))
kb, vb = tb = b.popitem()
self.assertEqual(vb, int(kb))
self.assert_(not(copymode < 0 and ta != tb))
self.assert_(not a)
self.assert_(not b)
d = {}
self.assertRaises(KeyError, d.popitem)
def test_pop(self):
# Tests for pop with specified key
d = {}
k, v = 'abc', 'def'
d[k] = v
self.assertRaises(KeyError, d.pop, 'ghi')
self.assertEqual(d.pop(k), v)
self.assertEqual(len(d), 0)
self.assertRaises(KeyError, d.pop, k)
# verify longs/ints get same value when key > 32 bits (for 64-bit archs)
# see SF bug #689659
x = 4503599627370496L
y = 4503599627370496
h = {x: 'anything', y: 'something else'}
self.assertEqual(h[x], h[y])
self.assertEqual(d.pop(k, v), v)
d[k] = v
self.assertEqual(d.pop(k, 1), v)
self.assertRaises(TypeError, d.pop)
class Exc(Exception): pass
class BadHash(object):
fail = False
def __hash__(self):
if self.fail:
raise Exc()
else:
return 42
x = BadHash()
d[x] = 42
x.fail = True
self.assertRaises(Exc, d.pop, x)
def test_mutatingiteration(self):
d = {}
d[1] = 1
try:
for i in d:
d[i+1] = 1
except RuntimeError:
pass
else:
self.fail("changing dict size during iteration doesn't raise Error")
def test_repr(self):
d = {}
self.assertEqual(repr(d), '{}')
d[1] = 2
self.assertEqual(repr(d), '{1: 2}')
d = {}
d[1] = d
self.assertEqual(repr(d), '{1: {...}}')
class Exc(Exception): pass
class BadRepr(object):
def __repr__(self):
raise Exc()
d = {1: BadRepr()}
self.assertRaises(Exc, repr, d)
Restructure comparison dramatically. There is no longer a default *ordering* between objects; there is only a default equality test (defined by an object being equal to itself only). Read the comment in object.c. The current implementation never uses a three-way comparison to compute a rich comparison, but it does use a rich comparison to compute a three-way comparison. I'm not quite done ripping out all the calls to PyObject_Compare/Cmp, or replacing tp_compare implementations with tp_richcompare implementations; but much of that has happened (to make most unit tests pass). The following tests still fail, because I need help deciding or understanding: test_codeop -- depends on comparing code objects test_datetime -- need Tim Peters' opinion test_marshal -- depends on comparing code objects test_mutants -- need help understanding it The problem with test_codeop and test_marshal is this: these tests compare two different code objects and expect them to be equal. Is that still a feature we'd like to support? I've temporarily removed the comparison and hash code from code objects, so they use the default (equality by pointer only) comparison. For the other two tests, run them to see for yourself. (There may be more failing test with "-u all".) A general problem with getting lots of these tests to pass is the reality that for object types that have a natural total ordering, implementing __cmp__ is much more convenient than implementing __eq__, __ne__, __lt__, and so on. Should we go back to allowing __cmp__ to provide a total ordering? Should we provide some other way to implement rich comparison with a single method override? Alex proposed a __key__() method; I've considered a __richcmp__() method. Or perhaps __cmp__() just shouldn't be killed off...
2006-08-23 21:41:19 -03:00
def test_eq(self):
self.assertEqual({}, {})
self.assertEqual({1: 2}, {1L: 2L})
class Exc(Exception): pass
class BadCmp(object):
def __eq__(self, other):
raise Exc()
def __hash__(self):
Restructure comparison dramatically. There is no longer a default *ordering* between objects; there is only a default equality test (defined by an object being equal to itself only). Read the comment in object.c. The current implementation never uses a three-way comparison to compute a rich comparison, but it does use a rich comparison to compute a three-way comparison. I'm not quite done ripping out all the calls to PyObject_Compare/Cmp, or replacing tp_compare implementations with tp_richcompare implementations; but much of that has happened (to make most unit tests pass). The following tests still fail, because I need help deciding or understanding: test_codeop -- depends on comparing code objects test_datetime -- need Tim Peters' opinion test_marshal -- depends on comparing code objects test_mutants -- need help understanding it The problem with test_codeop and test_marshal is this: these tests compare two different code objects and expect them to be equal. Is that still a feature we'd like to support? I've temporarily removed the comparison and hash code from code objects, so they use the default (equality by pointer only) comparison. For the other two tests, run them to see for yourself. (There may be more failing test with "-u all".) A general problem with getting lots of these tests to pass is the reality that for object types that have a natural total ordering, implementing __cmp__ is much more convenient than implementing __eq__, __ne__, __lt__, and so on. Should we go back to allowing __cmp__ to provide a total ordering? Should we provide some other way to implement rich comparison with a single method override? Alex proposed a __key__() method; I've considered a __richcmp__() method. Or perhaps __cmp__() just shouldn't be killed off...
2006-08-23 21:41:19 -03:00
return 1
d1 = {BadCmp(): 1}
d2 = {1: 1}
try:
Restructure comparison dramatically. There is no longer a default *ordering* between objects; there is only a default equality test (defined by an object being equal to itself only). Read the comment in object.c. The current implementation never uses a three-way comparison to compute a rich comparison, but it does use a rich comparison to compute a three-way comparison. I'm not quite done ripping out all the calls to PyObject_Compare/Cmp, or replacing tp_compare implementations with tp_richcompare implementations; but much of that has happened (to make most unit tests pass). The following tests still fail, because I need help deciding or understanding: test_codeop -- depends on comparing code objects test_datetime -- need Tim Peters' opinion test_marshal -- depends on comparing code objects test_mutants -- need help understanding it The problem with test_codeop and test_marshal is this: these tests compare two different code objects and expect them to be equal. Is that still a feature we'd like to support? I've temporarily removed the comparison and hash code from code objects, so they use the default (equality by pointer only) comparison. For the other two tests, run them to see for yourself. (There may be more failing test with "-u all".) A general problem with getting lots of these tests to pass is the reality that for object types that have a natural total ordering, implementing __cmp__ is much more convenient than implementing __eq__, __ne__, __lt__, and so on. Should we go back to allowing __cmp__ to provide a total ordering? Should we provide some other way to implement rich comparison with a single method override? Alex proposed a __key__() method; I've considered a __richcmp__() method. Or perhaps __cmp__() just shouldn't be killed off...
2006-08-23 21:41:19 -03:00
d1 == d2
except Exc:
pass
else:
self.fail("< didn't raise Exc")
def test_missing(self):
# Make sure dict doesn't have a __missing__ method
self.assertEqual(hasattr(dict, "__missing__"), False)
self.assertEqual(hasattr({}, "__missing__"), False)
# Test several cases:
# (D) subclass defines __missing__ method returning a value
# (E) subclass defines __missing__ method raising RuntimeError
# (F) subclass sets __missing__ instance variable (no effect)
# (G) subclass doesn't define __missing__ at a all
class D(dict):
def __missing__(self, key):
return 42
d = D({1: 2, 3: 4})
self.assertEqual(d[1], 2)
self.assertEqual(d[3], 4)
self.assert_(2 not in d)
self.assert_(2 not in d.keys())
self.assertEqual(d[2], 42)
class E(dict):
def __missing__(self, key):
raise RuntimeError(key)
e = E()
try:
e[42]
except RuntimeError, err:
self.assertEqual(err.args, (42,))
else:
self.fail_("e[42] didn't raise RuntimeError")
class F(dict):
def __init__(self):
# An instance variable __missing__ should have no effect
self.__missing__ = lambda key: None
f = F()
try:
f[42]
except KeyError, err:
self.assertEqual(err.args, (42,))
else:
self.fail_("f[42] didn't raise KeyError")
class G(dict):
pass
g = G()
try:
g[42]
except KeyError, err:
self.assertEqual(err.args, (42,))
else:
self.fail_("g[42] didn't raise KeyError")
from test import mapping_tests
class GeneralMappingTests(mapping_tests.BasicTestMappingProtocol):
type2test = dict
class Dict(dict):
pass
class SubclassMappingTests(mapping_tests.BasicTestMappingProtocol):
type2test = Dict
def test_main():
test_support.run_unittest(
DictTest,
GeneralMappingTests,
SubclassMappingTests,
)
if __name__ == "__main__":
test_main()