PEP 377 – Allow __enter__() methods to skip the statement body
- PEP
- 377
- Title
- Allow __enter__() methods to skip the statement body
- Author
- Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com>
- Status
- Rejected
- Type
- Standards Track
- Created
- 08-Mar-2009
- Python-Version
- 2.7, 3.1
- Post-History
- 08-Mar-2009
Contents
Abstract
This PEP proposes a backwards compatible mechanism that allows __enter__()
methods to skip the body of the associated with
statement. The lack of
this ability currently means the contextlib.contextmanager
decorator
is unable to fulfil its specification of being able to turn arbitrary
code into a context manager by moving it into a generator function
with a yield in the appropriate location. One symptom of this is that
contextlib.nested
will currently raise RuntimeError
in
situations where writing out the corresponding nested with
statements would not 1.
The proposed change is to introduce a new flow control exception
SkipStatement
, and skip the execution of the with
statement body if __enter__()
raises this exception.
PEP Rejection
This PEP was rejected by Guido 4 as it imposes too great an increase in complexity without a proportional increase in expressiveness and correctness. In the absence of compelling use cases that need the more complex semantics proposed by this PEP the existing behaviour is considered acceptable.
Proposed Change
The semantics of the with
statement will be changed to include a
new try
/except
/else
block around the call to __enter__()
.
If SkipStatement
is raised by the __enter__()
method, then
the main section of the with
statement (now located in the else
clause) will not be executed. To avoid leaving the names in any as
clause unbound in this case, a new StatementSkipped
singleton
(similar to the existing NotImplemented
singleton) will be
assigned to all names that appear in the as
clause.
The components of the with
statement remain as described in PEP 343 2:
with EXPR as VAR:
BLOCK
After the modification, the with
statement semantics would
be as follows:
mgr = (EXPR)
exit = mgr.__exit__ # Not calling it yet
try:
value = mgr.__enter__()
except SkipStatement:
VAR = StatementSkipped
# Only if "as VAR" is present and
# VAR is a single name
# If VAR is a tuple of names, then StatementSkipped
# will be assigned to each name in the tuple
else:
exc = True
try:
try:
VAR = value # Only if "as VAR" is present
BLOCK
except:
# The exceptional case is handled here
exc = False
if not exit(*sys.exc_info()):
raise
# The exception is swallowed if exit() returns true
finally:
# The normal and non-local-goto cases are handled here
if exc:
exit(None, None, None)
With the above change in place for the with
statement semantics,
contextlib.contextmanager()
will then be modified to raise
SkipStatement
instead of RuntimeError
when the underlying
generator doesn’t yield.
Rationale for Change
Currently, some apparently innocuous context managers may raise
RuntimeError
when executed. This occurs when the context
manager’s __enter__()
method encounters a situation where
the written out version of the code corresponding to the
context manager would skip the code that is now the body
of the with
statement. Since the __enter__()
method
has no mechanism available to signal this to the interpreter,
it is instead forced to raise an exception that not only
skips the body of the with
statement, but also jumps over
all code until the nearest exception handler. This goes against
one of the design goals of the with
statement, which was to
be able to factor out arbitrary common exception handling code
into a single context manager by putting into a generator
function and replacing the variant part of the code with a
yield
statement.
Specifically, the following examples behave differently if
cmB().__enter__()
raises an exception which cmA().__exit__()
then handles and suppresses:
with cmA():
with cmB():
do_stuff()
# This will resume here without executing "do_stuff()"
@contextlib.contextmanager
def combined():
with cmA():
with cmB():
yield
with combined():
do_stuff()
# This will raise a RuntimeError complaining that the context
# manager's underlying generator didn't yield
with contextlib.nested(cmA(), cmB()):
do_stuff()
# This will raise the same RuntimeError as the contextmanager()
# example (unsurprising, given that the nested() implementation
# uses contextmanager())
# The following class based version shows that the issue isn't
# specific to contextlib.contextmanager() (it also shows how
# much simpler it is to write context managers as generators
# instead of as classes!)
class CM(object):
def __init__(self):
self.cmA = None
self.cmB = None
def __enter__(self):
if self.cmA is not None:
raise RuntimeError("Can't re-use this CM")
self.cmA = cmA()
self.cmA.__enter__()
try:
self.cmB = cmB()
self.cmB.__enter__()
except:
self.cmA.__exit__(*sys.exc_info())
# Can't suppress in __enter__(), so must raise
raise
def __exit__(self, *args):
suppress = False
try:
if self.cmB is not None:
suppress = self.cmB.__exit__(*args)
except:
suppress = self.cmA.__exit__(*sys.exc_info()):
if not suppress:
# Exception has changed, so reraise explicitly
raise
else:
if suppress:
# cmB already suppressed the exception,
# so don't pass it to cmA
suppress = self.cmA.__exit__(None, None, None):
else:
suppress = self.cmA.__exit__(*args):
return suppress
With the proposed semantic change in place, the contextlib based examples above would then “just work”, but the class based version would need a small adjustment to take advantage of the new semantics:
class CM(object):
def __init__(self):
self.cmA = None
self.cmB = None
def __enter__(self):
if self.cmA is not None:
raise RuntimeError("Can't re-use this CM")
self.cmA = cmA()
self.cmA.__enter__()
try:
self.cmB = cmB()
self.cmB.__enter__()
except:
if self.cmA.__exit__(*sys.exc_info()):
# Suppress the exception, but don't run
# the body of the with statement either
raise SkipStatement
raise
def __exit__(self, *args):
suppress = False
try:
if self.cmB is not None:
suppress = self.cmB.__exit__(*args)
except:
suppress = self.cmA.__exit__(*sys.exc_info()):
if not suppress:
# Exception has changed, so reraise explicitly
raise
else:
if suppress:
# cmB already suppressed the exception,
# so don't pass it to cmA
suppress = self.cmA.__exit__(None, None, None):
else:
suppress = self.cmA.__exit__(*args):
return suppress
There is currently a tentative suggestion 3 to add import-style syntax to
the with
statement to allow multiple context managers to be included in
a single with
statement without needing to use contextlib.nested
. In
that case the compiler has the option of simply emitting multiple with
statements at the AST level, thus allowing the semantics of actual nested
with
statements to be reproduced accurately. However, such a change
would highlight rather than alleviate the problem the current PEP aims to
address: it would not be possible to use contextlib.contextmanager
to
reliably factor out such with
statements, as they would exhibit exactly
the same semantic differences as are seen with the combined()
context
manager in the above example.
Performance Impact
Implementing the new semantics makes it necessary to store the references
to the __enter__
and __exit__
methods in temporary variables instead
of on the stack. This results in a slight regression in with
statement
speed relative to Python 2.6/3.1. However, implementing a custom
SETUP_WITH
opcode would negate any differences between the two
approaches (as well as dramatically improving speed by eliminating more
than a dozen unnecessary trips around the eval loop).
Reference Implementation
Patch attached to Issue 5251 1. That patch uses only existing opcodes
(i.e. no SETUP_WITH
).
Acknowledgements
James William Pye both raised the issue and suggested the basic outline of the solution described in this PEP.
References
- 1 (1, 2)
- Issue 5251: contextlib.nested inconsistent with nested with statements (http://bugs.python.org/issue5251)
- 2
- PEP 343: The “with” Statement (http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0343/)
- 3
- Import-style syntax to reduce indentation of nested with statements (https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2009-March/003188.html)
- 4
- Guido’s rejection of the PEP (https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2009-March/087263.html)
Copyright
This document has been placed in the public domain.
Source: https://github.com/python/peps/blob/master/pep-0377.txt
Last modified: 2021-02-09 16:54:26 GMT