-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 72
Description
The py/with macro implementation doesn't correctly follow Python's with statement semantics. According to the Python documentation, the value bound in a with statement should be the return value of calling __enter__() on the context manager:
manager = (EXPRESSION)
enter = type(manager).__enter__
exit = type(manager).__exit__
value = enter(manager) # This value should be bound to TARGET
hit_except = False
try:
TARGET = value # TARGET gets the return value of enter(manager)
SUITE
...Current Implementation
The current macro (with.clj#L45-L63) calls __enter__ but discards its return value:
(py-fn/call-attr ~varname "__enter__" nil) ; Return value is ignored
(try
(let [retval# (do ~@body)]
...Expected Behavior
The bound variable should receive the return value of __enter__(), not the context manager itself:
(let [enter-result# (py-fn/call-attr ~varname "__enter__" nil)]
(try
(let [~varname enter-result# ; Rebind to __enter__'s return value
retval# (do ~@body)]
...Why Current Tests Pass
The existing test in python_test.clj#L167 uses a WithObjClass where __enter__() returns None (implicitly), and the test methods are called on the original object. This masks the bug.
Real-World Example
A common Python pattern that fails with the current implementation:
with open('file.txt', 'r') as f:
content = f.read() # f should be the file object returned by __enter__With the current macro, f would be bound to the unopened file path/manager rather than the file object returned by __enter__().
Next Steps
- Add test cases that verify this behavior (e.g., update
WithObjClass.__enter__to return a different object, or test with Python's built-in file context manager) - Update the macro to correctly bind the return value of
__enter__()